Brussels Airlines future and financial perspective

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
sean1982
Posts: 3223
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by sean1982 » 16 Sep 2015, 08:13

RoMax wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
tolipanebas wrote: Expected pax volumes for the next year(s) are very ambitious: 8M pax is just second place again, sorry. :wave:
8M? We're aiming for 150 million :D
I'm not a fan of such comparisons, no mather in which way, because it is always with the intention on this forum to 'be better than the others' or something. But anyway, IF we do compare, please do it properly. Compare SN with FR in Belgium only. FR always uses their market share in Belgium as a marketing tool in presentations, press conferences, etc. in Belgium and they also don't say hey look we have 80 or 90 or 100 million pax (or in case of forecast, say something like 150) and SN just 6 or 7 or 8 or whatever.
Me neither, but I wasnt the one who brought it up. Anyway, tolip is obviously overjoyed with his fleet expansion and rocketing pax numbers, I would not be so happy. This is going to put a lot of pressure on SN as the seats obviously need to be filled AT DECEND YIELDS.

As we all know, Sabena had excellent loadfactors but 1 year of profit. So, bragging about load factors and 15 (as a figure of speech) extra Airbus aircraft (not mentioning then that for every plane entering there is one leaving as well) is one thing. Making money with it, is something else ;)

crew1990
Posts: 1066
Joined: 29 Dec 2010, 21:46

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by crew1990 » 16 Sep 2015, 08:52

Conti764 wrote:
tolipanebas wrote:If you want to have an idea of the cabin layout post modification: check Aer Lingus or vueling seatmaps.
They have the same 144 seat lay out on A319, respectively 180 seats on A320.
The modification literally brings the capacity of an additional A319 for free.
And that fleet itself is going to grow by a lot already, next year.
The Airbus fleet is going to be re-centered on A320s over A319s in the coming years too, btw.
Expected pax volumes for the next year(s) are very ambitious: 8M pax is just second place again, sorry. :wave:
Does this mean A319's will start leaving the fleet as well in favor of A320's or will SN focus on just adding more A320's then A319's, thus growing the fleet?
On the Short haul fleet SN has for the moment

12 RJ100
18 A319
7 A320

With the fact that the 12 RJ100 and the OO-SSP are leaving, if they are all replaced by A320 then the A320 with take over the A319 in term of number.

17 A319
20 A320

Inquirer
Posts: 2050
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by Inquirer » 16 Sep 2015, 11:05

sean1982 wrote:... (with) fleet expansion and rocketing pax numbers, I would not be so happy. This is going to put a lot of pressure on SN as the seats obviously need to be filled AT DECEND YIELDS.
May I point out for a minute that you are actually putting down one of the basic principles behind a mass sales strategy, a concept which shouldn't be completely unknown to you?

Sure, one of the key features of it is you'll have a low unit price (otherwise, you won't sell masses of it), but if you get the balance between price/quality on one hand and cost on the other hand right, then that low price is compensated by the much larger sale volumes. I really shouldn't be explaining you any of this, should I?

Clearly the only difficult thing is to get that delicate balance right and as your employer has experienced not so long ago, you quickly end up in the red if you are no longer seen as offering "a good deal", regardless how low priced you still are and regardless how much tickets you do sell, or alternatively -and this is what you are repeatedly playing at- if your costs are not in line with the lower unit sale price.

In this respect, it's interesting to note how both their consolidated operational and financial figures from last year not only reveal them to offer a set of products which are perceived by the masses to come with a very good price/quality ratio -hence their amazing growth figures-, but also that they were able to make more money from it, as seen by their much improved bottom line.
And mind you, that was in a very high oil cost environment still: today, we're in a different world, almost.
In short: you're betting against the bank with your hopes, not because they are theoretical nonsense (far from it even), but because they do not take into account the new practicalities which they partially created for themselves, partially got handed to them at exactly the right moment.

User avatar
Conti764
Posts: 1686
Joined: 21 Sep 2007, 23:21

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by Conti764 » 16 Sep 2015, 11:29

How long does SN have to proof to have financial stability before LH takes the remaining shares? Since the option to purchase them has passed, may the Germans be satisfied by their current share or is SN still to be bought completely?

sean1982
Posts: 3223
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by sean1982 » 16 Sep 2015, 11:39

Inquirer wrote:
sean1982 wrote:... (with) fleet expansion and rocketing pax numbers, I would not be so happy. This is going to put a lot of pressure on SN as the seats obviously need to be filled AT DECEND YIELDS.
May I point out for a minute that you are actually putting down one of the basic principles behind a mass sales strategy, a concept which shouldn't be completely unknown to you?

Sure, one of the key features of it is you have a low unit price (otherwise, you won't sell masses of it), but if you get the balance between price/quality on one hand and cost on the other hand right, then that low price is compensated by the much larger sale volumes. I really shouldn't be explaining you any of this, should I?

Clearly the only difficult thing is to get that delicate balance right and as your employer has experienced not so long ago, you quickly end up in the red if you are no longer seen as offering "a good deal", regardless how low priced you still are, or alternatively -and this is what you are repeatedly playing at- if your costs are not in line with the lower unit sale price.

In this respect, it's interesting to note how both their consolidated operational and financial figures from last year not only reveal them to offer a set of products which are perceived by the masses to come with a very good price/quality ratio -hence their amazing growth figures-, but also that they were able to make more money from it, as seen by their much improved bottom line.
And mind you, that was in a very high oil cost environment still: today, we're in a different world, almost.
In short: you're betting against the bank with your hopes, not because they are nonsense (far from it even), but because they do not take into account the new reality which they partially created themselves, partially got handed to them at exactly the right moment.
First of all: I dont have any "hopes", so dont accuse me of that

My employer in the red? I must have missed that. Maybe a part of the fiscal year yes, but im sure that SN doesnt make profit during winter either (but they dont publish quarterly results) FR is looking at a 1.3 billion euro profit, so lets not go there. (And that part of your message is OT anyway as it has nothing to do with SN)

Price/quality? I hate to use skytrax but as passenger likes to use it a lot: Lets have a look. SN has dropped from a 6/10 to a 5/10 recently (same as FR). They have 1 star out of 25 more than FR on "food and beverage" because of the long haul. One passenger noted that:" we go the extra smile for me meant: we take some more money for the same service as an LCC

Is this surprising? Of course not, SN is now essentially an LCC with a long haul arm. Passengers who are used to flying legacies are noticing this as well and arent happy.

Morphing to an all Airbus fleet brings down costs like training and maintenance but also raises costs like landing fees, fuel, more crew etc ... Furthermore some SN's routes are too thin for an A319 even. That's why the dash 8's and the E135 are leased, but they wont make up for all the routes where a 100-seater was preferred over an Airbus.

The one thing that SN had going for them at the moment is that they can offset their low yields on their routes that are in direct competition with the LCC's on their other routes where fares in general are substantially higher. As long as the competition in BRU remains relativly low this is good, but both FR and U2 are set to double their fleet (with new and more fuel efficient airplanes) in the next 5-6 years and are heavily focussed on primary airports. The other advantage is that oil prices are low, but this wont last either. Yes, they are doing well, because the conditions are optimal, but these conditions are also changing quickly

So while you and others are shouting victory inquirer, my take on it is that it is a very risky strategy indeed, which might pay off but could also have the Total opposite effect.
Last edited by sean1982 on 16 Sep 2015, 11:51, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 36311
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by sn26567 » 16 Sep 2015, 11:44

Conti764 wrote:Does this mean A319's will start leaving the fleet as well in favor of A320's or will SN focus on just adding more A320's then A319's, thus growing the fleet?
Does it mean also that on thinner routes where even an A319 is way too big, SN will continue to wet-lease smaller aircraft from Flybe or BMI?
André
ex Sabena #26567

teach
Posts: 740
Joined: 23 Feb 2005, 00:00

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by teach » 16 Sep 2015, 13:40

sean1982 wrote:As we all know, Sabena had excellent loadfactors
LOL! No they didn't! They consistently underperformed on load factor, almost always staying south of 70%, except for peak summer (where they normally didn't get higher than 75% either).

User avatar
RoMax
Posts: 4426
Joined: 20 Jun 2009, 16:32

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by RoMax » 16 Sep 2015, 15:55

teach wrote:
sean1982 wrote:As we all know, Sabena had excellent loadfactors
LOL! No they didn't! They consistently underperformed on load factor, almost always staying south of 70%, except for peak summer (where they normally didn't get higher than 75% either).
While I agree that Sabena's load factors were not out of the ordinary, mind that average industry loadfactors in the nineties and early 2000's where way below these of today. Not sure about the exact difference, but it will close to 10% difference.

Anyway, flightglobal has an article with some comments of Gustin that he made at the World Low Cost Airlines Congress in London yesterday. I'm not sure if the article is available for free, so some key points:
- Gustin says SN is "more than surviving" the LCC threat and now "growing profitably" after adopting a hybrid business model
- SN managed to increase capacity by 15% and reduce costs by a similar margin despite the launch of the Vueling and Ryanair bases
- "The carrier has achieved this by adopting a model intended to "reconcile attractive fares with a low-cost approach but with a notion of service", in a bid for differentiation from competitors."
- SN says that as they were unable to match the LCC's on price, SN has "really been able to segment the market" by offering four products in Europe that have "clearly positioned" the carrier in the market.
- Between the LCCs and SN, other competitors have been lost in translation according to Gustin
- SN averages load factors of about 75%, which Gustin admits "might not sound great", but they came a long way and SN aims for these "clearly to be in the 80s"
- A surprising one for me, and I wonder if that is in fact what he said or a typo or misinterpretation: SN is phasing out the Avro RJ100's, which Gustin says is a move towards a fleet of Airbus A320s and A321s. He also added (but that's not new): "A 40-European-aircraft company cannot have two types of aircraft".
- If they need anything smaller, they will wet-lease it (also not new)
- The last seems to talk about the European FFP that has been talked about, but this quote seems confusing, first they seem to imply Lufthansa will do the roll-out of the FFP, the second sentence seems to imply SN is actually the laboratory and it could later be implemented by the rest of the group, but I could misunderstand this one: "Gustin discloses that Brussels Airlines' part-owner Lufthansa Group is preparing to roll out a "Europe-wide" frequent-flyer programme next month. This will be directed "against traditional low-cost competitors", he says.
While "high-risk", this is a "nice laboratory" and could be replicated elsewhere in Lufthansa Group is it proves successful, suggests Gustin."

sean1982
Posts: 3223
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by sean1982 » 16 Sep 2015, 16:36

RoMax wrote: While "high-risk", this is a "nice laboratory" and could be replicated elsewhere in Lufthansa Group is it proves successful, suggests Gustin."

Glad to see that Gustin agrees with my analysis :)

Inquirer
Posts: 2050
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by Inquirer » 16 Sep 2015, 17:23

sean1982 wrote:First of all: I dont have any "hopes", so dont accuse me of that.
I wasn't accusing you, I was going by how your posts come across; my appologies if I sensed them wrongly.
sean1982 wrote:SN is now essentially an LCC with a long haul arm.
The term 'LCC' covers so many different products these days, everybody but Air France or SWISS somehow seems to be (pretending to be) one: I'd say they are a near perfect clone or Aer Lingus: an easyjet with a low cost niche market of roughly 10 planes. Whether or not you call that a LCC like you do, I have no clue.
My personal reading is that the days of LCC and full service airlines are over: everybody is morphing into the kind of hybrid airline that is hitting the sweet spot. Even ryanair tries to, as you know all too well.
Wizzair seems to be the only one stubbornly refusing to move along. Wonder for how long.
sean1982 wrote: As long as the competition in BRU remains relativly low this is good, but both FR and U2 are set to double their fleet (with new and more fuel efficient airplanes) in the next 5-6 years and are heavily focussed on primary airports. The other advantage is that oil prices are low, but this wont last either. Yes, they are doing well, because the conditions are optimal, but these conditions are also changing quickly
I am really amazed by your confidence it can't be but a temporary improvement,driven by the believe it is totally impossible to compete successfully against ryanair or easyjet if there's a bit more headwind from higher oil prices or increased competition.
The airline I have mentioned above for instance demonstrates on a daily basis such is entirely possible, which is probably one of the reasons why they are turning into a clone of them too.
There's no magic to it, you know? Provided you have control over your cost base and offer a product perceived to be giving value for (a bit more) money, you will have success: the notion a plane ticket is just a basic commodity like gas, water or electricity where only the price matters is one that is understandably pushed very hard by a certain CEO, but as easyjet demonstrates too, you can be highly successful even if you are not the cheapest, but offering a slightly better service at a slightly higher price.
Just as not everybody does his weekly shopping at LIDL, Colruyt or ALDI, whithout them wanting their Carrefour to look like a local spin off of Harrods.
sean1982 wrote:So while you and others are shouting victory inquirer,
Why would I be shouting victory?
I am not directly involved in any of this, and besides: it's an evolutive process.
If you and I are still in good health, we're still going to be discussing these matters in 5 or 10 years time, so there's never a conclusive ending to it. And that's how it should be in a free market, I'd say.
sean1982 wrote: my take on it is that it is a very risky strategy indeed, which might pay off but could also have the Total opposite effect.
Entrepreneurship always entails risks: otherwise, what's the point?
I think the low risk approach was to keep doing what they were doing: it's for sure the simplest thing to do, but it was also a guarantee for failure. They didnt and it turns out it pays off!
I'd say they did a very good job, one that nobody expected them to be able to do.
As a fairly senior business manager myself, I can say the team which came up with this, deserves some praise for it.
RoMax wrote:flightglobal has an article with some comments of Gustin that he made at the World Low Cost Airlines Congress in London yesterday. I'm not sure if the article is available for free, so some key points:
Thanks for those quotes: very interesting reading, I am sure.
As well as the fact he's popping up at this forum too of course. ;)
He sounds confident on their current and future performance in the face of other (?) lowcost competitors.
If you are just like 'them' you needn't be overly worried by their increased presence indeed: they are then largely irrelevant to you.

teach
Posts: 740
Joined: 23 Feb 2005, 00:00

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by teach » 16 Sep 2015, 17:49

RoMax wrote:While I agree that Sabena's load factors were not out of the ordinary, mind that average industry loadfactors in the nineties and early 2000's where way below these of today. Not sure about the exact difference, but it will close to 10% difference.
While it is true that load factors were lower than they are now on average, Sabena was consistently around 5% below the European average.

sean1982
Posts: 3223
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by sean1982 » 16 Sep 2015, 18:01

Inquirer wrote:
sean1982 wrote:First of all: I dont have any "hopes", so dont accuse me of that.
I wasn't accusing you, I was going by how your posts come across; my appologies if I sensed them wrongly.
sean1982 wrote:SN is now essentially an LCC with a long haul arm.
The term 'LCC' covers so many different products these days, everybody but Air France or SWISS somehow seems to be (pretending to be) one: I'd say they are a near perfect clone or Aer Lingus: an easyjet with a low cost niche market of roughly 10 planes. Whether or not you call that a LCC like you do, I have no clue.
My personal reading is that the days of LCC and full service airlines are over: everybody is morphing into the kind of hybrid airline that is hitting the sweet spot. Even ryanair tries to, as you know all too well.
Wizzair seems to be the only one stubbornly refusing to move along. Wonder for how long.
sean1982 wrote: As long as the competition in BRU remains relativly low this is good, but both FR and U2 are set to double their fleet (with new and more fuel efficient airplanes) in the next 5-6 years and are heavily focussed on primary airports. The other advantage is that oil prices are low, but this wont last either. Yes, they are doing well, because the conditions are optimal, but these conditions are also changing quickly
I am really amazed by your confidence it can't be but a temporary improvement,driven by the believe it is totally impossible to compete successfully against ryanair or easyjet if there's a bit more headwind from higher oil prices or increased competition.
The airline I have mentioned above for instance demonstrates on a daily basis such is entirely possible, which is probably one of the reasons why they are turning into a clone of them too.
There's no magic to it, you know? Provided you have control over your cost base and offer a product perceived to be giving value for (a bit more) money, you will have success: the notion a plane ticket is just a basic commodity like gas, water or electricity where only the price matters is one that is understandably pushed very hard by a certain CEO, but as easyjet demonstrates too, you can be highly successful even if you are not the cheapest, but offering a slightly better service at a slightly higher price.
Just as not everybody does his weekly shopping at LIDL, Colruyt or ALDI, whithout them wanting their Carrefour to look like a local spin off of Harrods.
sean1982 wrote:So while you and others are shouting victory inquirer,
Why would I be shouting victory?
I am not directly involved in any of this, and besides: it's an evolutive process.
If you and I are still in good health, we're still going to be discussing these matters in 5 or 10 years time, so there's never a conclusive ending to it. And that's how it should be in a free market, I'd say.
sean1982 wrote: my take on it is that it is a very risky strategy indeed, which might pay off but could also have the Total opposite effect.
Entrepreneurship always entails risks: otherwise, what's the point?
I think the low risk approach was to keep doing what they were doing: it's for sure the simplest thing to do, but it was also a guarantee for failure. They didnt and it turns out it pays off!
I'd say they did a very good job, one that nobody expected them to be able to do.
As a fairly senior business manager myself, I can say the team which came up with this, deserves some praise for it.
RoMax wrote:flightglobal has an article with some comments of Gustin that he made at the World Low Cost Airlines Congress in London yesterday. I'm not sure if the article is available for free, so some key points:
Thanks for those quotes: very interesting reading, I am sure.
As well as the fact he's popping up at this forum too of course. ;)
He sounds confident on their current and future performance in the face of other (?) lowcost competitors.
If you are just like 'them' you needn't be overly worried by their increased presence indeed: they are then largely irrelevant to you.

I wouldnt call swiss, air france or KLM LCC's no. We also know that they are struggling to make their short haul profitable and that their main reason for doing it is to feed their long haul traffic and not to attract low yield point-to-point passengers.

The part in my post about price/quality and how (some) passengers comment on it you ignore, because your whole argument is pivoting on that. Passengers however on this independent review site are scoring FR and SN equal.

And what amazes me is that the management team at my employer has realised a 1,3 billion EUR profit and employs thousands of europeans directly and 10's of thousands indirectly but yet you cant seem to manage to say a good word about it at all :)

User avatar
RoMax
Posts: 4426
Joined: 20 Jun 2009, 16:32

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by RoMax » 16 Sep 2015, 18:12

sean1982 wrote:We also know that they are struggling to make their short haul profitable and that their main reason for doing it is to feed their long haul traffic and not to attract low yield point-to-point passengers.
That's not completely true, FSNCs like KLM, AF, LX etc. do aim to attract OD passengers and no they are not low-yield, on the contrary. A good network carrier aims to attract a right balance of OD and transfer passengers, the transfer they need for their long haul, the OD they need to balance up the profitability of the European network. In terms of yields these OD pax bring much more to the European network for carriers such as KL, LX etc. compared to transfer pax, but they need both to survive. The problem starts when they can't compete with LCCs for the OD pax and they indeed become 'too-low-yield' pax.

User avatar
KriVa
Posts: 1372
Joined: 31 Mar 2010, 20:15
Contact:

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by KriVa » 16 Sep 2015, 19:07

sean1982 wrote:And what amazes me is that the management team at my employer has realised a 1,3 billion EUR profit and employs thousands of europeans directly and 10's of thousands indirectly but yet you cant seem to manage to say a good word about it at all :)
That would be because this topic happens to be about SN, which is not your employer, as far as I know.
Keep it on topic, all of you.
Off topic posts will be deleted, no matter how informative.
You have been warned.
Thomas

User avatar
RoMax
Posts: 4426
Joined: 20 Jun 2009, 16:32

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by RoMax » 02 Oct 2015, 21:06

I don't know if this is the best topic to post this, but as it is related to the shift of NBO from SN to LH (and ACC back to SN) I think this news fits here. LH is seriously downgrading capacity on this route.
Instead of operating an A340-300 with 279 seats (starting 25 Oct) they'll use a Privatair 737-700 with 86 seats (2-class configuration). This is currently sheduled until the end of August 2016. Also instead operating daily in 2016 summer peak season, they now plan just 3 flights per week.

http://airlineroute.net/2015/10/02/lh-nbo-w15update/

Initially the frequency was planned to be higher, starting at 4/week, soon going to 5/week in December and daily in 2016. Not much later that upgrade to daily was already revised back to 4/weekly for most of the winter schedule.

What can this mean? That the shift seems to turn out in a big fail? Or rather a sign of what was said here before by some members (including me) that NBO is long past the stage of being 'the golden market' in East Africa?

Meanwhile Kenya Airways continues to struggle as well. One of their flagship routes to Europe, NBO-AMS (in cooperation with shareholder and joint-venture partner KLM) was downgraded from the 777-300ER to the 787-8 as the T7 proved to be too large for Kenya Airways. In combination with their financial problems this resulted in the decision to remove al T7's from the fleet (also the -200ERs) and use a much smaller widebody fleet focussed around the 788.

nordikcam
Posts: 1018
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:22
Location: Uccle

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by nordikcam » 02 Oct 2015, 21:41

RoMax wrote:I don't know if this is the best topic to post this, but as it is related to the shift of NBO from SN to LH (and ACC back to SN) I think this news fits here. LH is seriously downgrading capacity on this route.
Instead of operating an A340-300 with 279 seats (starting 25 Oct) they'll use a Privatair 737-700 with 86 seats (2-class configuration). This is currently sheduled until the end of August 2016. Also instead operating daily in 2016 summer peak season, they now plan just 3 flights per week.

http://airlineroute.net/2015/10/02/lh-nbo-w15update/

What can this mean? That the shift seems to turn out in a big fail? Or rather a sign of what was said here before by some members (including me) that NBO is long past the stage of being 'the golden market' in East Africa?
May be a come back for SN next summer with A330 - 200 of LH ??

convair
Posts: 1811
Joined: 18 Nov 2011, 00:02

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by convair » 02 Oct 2015, 22:18

nordikcam wrote:
RoMax wrote:I don't know if this is the best topic to post this, but as it is related to the shift of NBO from SN to LH (and ACC back to SN) I think this news fits here. LH is seriously downgrading capacity on this route.
Instead of operating an A340-300 with 279 seats (starting 25 Oct) they'll use a Privatair 737-700 with 86 seats (2-class configuration). This is currently sheduled until the end of August 2016. Also instead operating daily in 2016 summer peak season, they now plan just 3 flights per week.

http://airlineroute.net/2015/10/02/lh-nbo-w15update/

What can this mean? That the shift seems to turn out in a big fail? Or rather a sign of what was said here before by some members (including me) that NBO is long past the stage of being 'the golden market' in East Africa?
May be a come back for SN next summer with A330 - 200 of LH ??
Very strange since, if I'm not mistaken, SN has consistently served NBO 5 times a week, even last winter, albeit with triangular flights! It would be interesting to know how well these flights are doing.

I don't believe SN will come back on the route though: lack of planes and/or falling demand.

BAAV
Posts: 46
Joined: 08 Jun 2013, 18:03

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by BAAV » 03 Oct 2015, 09:08

I tried to book Brussels -Nairobi last week, besides to my surprise the Privatair flight the other alternative LH is offering is a flight to Addis via Jeddah and then another with Ethiopian to Nairobi. You can hardly call this a selling proposition. Four 'legs' from Brussels... I booked with Swiss. If this is the LH offer going forward maybe then better leave it to Swiss or ask SN back offering their traditional triangular flights on that route. From my experience though (5 flights or so over last years) with SN on that route more people board at the other destinations than in Nairobi and the route seems to have lost some traction. Also from the people I know in Kenya, Turkish and the Arab based airlines seem to be very popular with them. Of course one cannot extrapolate personal experiences but it may give an indication

SabenaForever
Posts: 491
Joined: 24 Dec 2003, 00:00

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by SabenaForever » 03 Oct 2015, 11:25

BAAV wrote:I tried to book Brussels -Nairobi last week, besides to my surprise the Privatair flight the other alternative LH is offering is a flight to Addis via Jeddah and then another with Ethiopian to Nairobi. You can hardly call this a selling proposition. Four 'legs' from Brussels... I booked with Swiss. If this is the LH offer going forward maybe then better leave it to Swiss or ask SN back offering their traditional triangular flights on that route. From my experience though (5 flights or so over last years) with SN on that route more people board at the other destinations than in Nairobi and the route seems to have lost some traction. Also from the people I know in Kenya, Turkish and the Arab based airlines seem to be very popular with them. Of course one cannot extrapolate personal experiences but it may give an indication
They Changed the aircraft from a A340 to a B73W of Privatair till the end of August 2016... Weird deciscion to me... Leave the african network to SN, LH! ;)

Inquirer
Posts: 2050
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Brussels airlines future and financial perspective

Post by Inquirer » 03 Oct 2015, 12:56

According to De Tijd,
http://www.tijd.be/ondernemen/luchtvaar ... newsteaser
A new financial mechanism has been agreed between the Belgian gouvernement and the EC to provide financial inventives to -amongst others- Brussels Airlines at our national airport.
The new mechanism is designed at helping only those airlines using BRU as transfer point, rather than just give security fee discounts to whomever reaches certain predetermined volumes of traffic like in the past.
The idea is that connecting passengers are traffic flows which otherwise would not come to BRU and are thus an additional activity for the airport and the country for which financial incentives are justified.
The EC is said to have had problems with the old system of volumetric discounts, mainly because it was ment to keep using the traffic volumes of 2013 -rather than the most recent figures- for the next few years, most obviously in an effort to lock out newly arrived airlines at BRU like e.g. ryanair.
In this perspective, it's interesting to note that there was apparently no payment done for the year 2014 to avoid any future legal problems according to De Tijd! If confirmed, this makes their financial results over 2014 (-4M) an even more spectacular turnaround vs 2013 than it already looked at first because those results did include the in hindsight unique payment.

Post Reply