brussels airlines to New York!

[OO-ITR]

What post did you read, Mr_Boeing, if I may ask? I didn't see anything...

me neither...and I love it !!!

[Inquirer]

the main reason why JFK is launched is not to allow pax more US destinations via JFK but to use it as feeder for the africa network + O&D.

That's how I understood it too: to stimulate this route further, they must above all grow at the BRU (and in fact African) side; then this route can't do badly really.

If the route doesn't perform as expected after some months i'm sure they will adjust the strategy but for now they should keep it as it is. we still haven't had the first flight and already some think its doomed.

No nonsense it was called... I'd call it just negative opiniating.

Let's face it, Flanker: when was the last time you have said a single positive thing about B.air?
Starting from their fleet, over their destinations, via their schedule and their on board product, past their name, their livery, their website address, their advertisements; every single time it was only negative talk from you, not just once, but numerous and repeated times till you're often beating a dead horse really.

There's a reason why half this forum has you on their foe list and isn't even getting your posts displayed any longer: you may try to look as if it doesn't bother you the least, but seriously: nobody in his right mind would be posting here is he knew there would be zero people reading his posts: might as well post on luchtzak.ru then.

[Flanker]

My opinions on SN are based on sound and detailed analysis. You can always prove me wrong with arguments.
But the arguments have to be decently written and thought-through, otherwise it's insulting and it degenerates into a meaningless emotional discussion.
I also analysed the issues at Ryanair and criticized the investment policies of Wallonia.

I can't post anything positive when there is nothing positive to post about SN.
I posted something positive about TK recently about their African expansion using narrowbodies but again I wasn't so fond of their financials.

This is a Belgian forum, so it's normal that the big topic is the national airline. I don't think that many people would care to discuss the problems at KLM or British Airways or Turkish or Aeroflot.
About Cityjet, TNT Airways, Thomas Cook, Jetair, there's not much to say.
Well now there is some to say about TAY but the discussions didn't attract the interest that SN's did.

So who's the biased one? To me it sounds like you are.

[Flanker]

the main reason why JFK is launched is not to allow pax more US destinations via JFK but to use it as feeder for the africa network + O&D. If the route doesn't perform as expected after some months i'm sure they will adjust the strategy but for now they should keep it as it is. we still haven't had the first flight and already some think its doomed.

It's a fair point.
What I fail to grasp is what financial advantages this will bring to SN compared to working with partners like UA.
It's an operational advantage but unless it translates into financial gain, I don't see the point.

Gustin's public justification for the route was a chauvinistic one rather than a financial one. A new route can be analysed but it's pretty unpredictable until you actually launch it, but the initial numbers aren't looking good. I was neutral and cautious in my initial posts in the first pages of this thread but now the fog is clearing and the picture is becoming rather ugly.

So they have taken a calculated risk by moving outside of their comfort zone: isn't that what doing business is all about? I'd say give JFK your best shot, see what it brings and if it doesn't fully deliver, try something else: no big deal to me. It's not this single route which is going to make or brake the company, is it?

The cost of launching such a route, without counting in the initial losses is in the millions.
But the initial success and operational losses are unpredictable.
It may appear as a calculated risk to you but for an airline that just had the worst year of its existence wherein in one single year it wiped off clean 8 years of marginal profits and the financial pillars are becoming uncertain, launching as unpredictable a route as JFK is a big gamble that could make or break it.
The losses that Sabena incurred on this route should have been a benchmark for reflection.

A calculated risk would have been to open a route to South America where traffic is staying strong or to Hong Kong where they could have looked for new African feeding opportunities.
Or even to South Africa, for Diamond traffic and shipments, where the shipments alone would have justified the route (although it would have been a big blow for the general aviation contenders Abelag and co).

So for me there must be a different reason why they're all trying so hard to make things not work and the only reason I can see is LH having other plans.

[LJ]

This is not the right way to fill the JFK flights. It seems to me that codeshare flights with JetBlue and/or United should have been negotiated for continuation of travel from New York before printing the timetable. Where are the SN marketing people?

Why would SN promote codeshares ex JFK? SN's future owner LH probably doesn't like codshares ex JFK (especially if on JetBlue) as it needs to fill its own planes first. Moreover, isn't the whole point of SN flying JFK-BRU getting some transfer pax? Furthermore, what's in it for UA? They need to fill their planes ex EWR (and which should become emptier.

As for the success of BRU-JFK. It all depends on how they're going to do in the Winter. Anyone knows that demand for transatlantic flights is high during Summer and goes down heavily in Winter (with January - March being the most depressing time). If AA and DL don't reduce capacity and still getting the necessary traffic in W12, it will be an indication that SN isn't getting much of the O&D traffic (which is still the highest yielding business).

[Inquirer]

My opinions on SN are based on sound and detailed analysis.

Maybe that's true, but allow me to say that whereas you always say so, you haven't posted much of all that so far; all we've seen from you are very negative conclusions yet whether or not those are based on any factual evidence indeed, or rather just self-invented conjecture, only you know.

Oh, and there's really no need to attack ordinary people like me for pointing this thing out, like you've repeatedly done.

Arguments have to be decently written and thought-through, otherwise it's insulting and it degenerates into a meaningless emotional discussion.

Allow me to say your post aren't exactly of the high flying type either, when it comes to respecting other people's remarks...

So who's the biased one? To me it sounds like you are.

Further proof of the above.
Take the high way, please, and others will follow.

What I fail to grasp is what financial advantages this will bring to SN compared to working with partners like UA.

B.air claims their transatlantic partners do not offer them nearly enough capacity on their routes to sell all the tickets they could sell and they are thus loosing revenues (in other words: their flights to Africa leave emptier than needed simply because they couldnt sell those emply seats to America bound passengers as UA had no seats left for them): whether that is right indeed, nobody here can tell for sure, but its not impossible either that it is true indeed.

A new route can be analysed but it's pretty unpredictable until you actually launch it, but the initial numbers aren't looking good. I was neutral and cautious in my initial posts in the first pages of this thread but now the fog is clearing and the picture is becoming rather ugly.

Actually, i don't know what you base that statement on?
Do you have real figures to share, or is this more of your "sound and detailed analysis", as you call it?
Please share, otherwise what's the point?

[Inquirer]

As for the success of BRU-JFK. It all depends on how they're going to do in the Winter. Anyone knows that demand for transatlantic flights is high during Summer and goes down heavily in Winter (with January - March being the most depressing time).

exactly my thoughts

I am convinced there's a good reason why they launch right in the middle of S12 and not let's say end March already or end October. IMHO, its because that way they can actually test the market at its best, see what it gives and get a hands on feel at minimal risk so they can still adjust before winter time comes.

I'd say that is a fairly sound plan and am i fully supportive to testing it; just as I am supportive to testing other long haul routes too, some of which have been mentioned, even though i doubt there's going to be much demand for any flight from Asia to Africa via BRU. Remember there's a whole load of mega-hubs sitting on a far more direct path right in between Asia and Africa somewhere in the Persian gulf.
Some South American route however, seems like a better target to me, or why not, the Caribbean: of the 3 big airline groups in Europe, LH is the only one totally absent in this region: this could even turn out to be a second niche of theirs, if it works well!
Oh well, i'll probably get flamed for suggesting something weird now: after all, what do I know, right?

[Inquirer]

Question to the moderators: Has any of you been tampering with some of the posts here?

I ask because for some reason there has been a very significant change made to one of my previous posts!

The post in question contained a rather shocking quote from Flanker on him being foed by several members of this forum, a remark which he removed again shortly after posting it, yet I had picked it up meanwhile and commented on it as it was extremely arrogant and defiant in tone: for some reason however, both the quote as well as my comment to it have been removed now?!

I agree that it became off topic after Flanker revoked his initial comment, but still it would be good if we'd be informed of editorial re-writes of our posts as I've always automatically assumed everything to be from the hand of the member posting it. It seems this is not so sure any longer?!

Care to enlighten us, please, because this is quite disturbing!

[Conti764]

I don't argue that, I argue with the fact that you seem to be jumping with joy while the numbers are not so good. I'm a no-nonsense person as you know by now.

You just seem to put down every step SN takes and for me, not even a regular reader - let alone poster - on this forum, it gets pretty anoying. Everybody is in title of his opinion, but you just seem to hope SN will fail and go belly up just to prove that you were right,

To me, given the current deteriorating financial situation of the company and unpredictable outlook in a very unstable business environment which seems to be turning bitter negative, I find this launch reckless and very difficult to justify.

So when is a good time to start your own transatlantic flights in the ongoing African 'rumble' with AFKLM? Let's face it... 9W is too risky to rely on, especially given the latest rumours of them moving to MUC. DL and AA are out of the questions. Remains UA. It's a reliable partner airline, but if loads are similar to those CO generated when they were a seperate company, you don't have to expect too much feeding from the UA flight since it's already pretty ful with O&D-pax. And unless UA is willing to deploy the elsewhere much needed 747 on EWR-BRU, you can't get anything bigger then todays 772.

The only logical step to even improve loads on Africa bound flights, with pax coming from a region with a large African American community, is to start your own flight. For now, if those pax want a smooth one-stop connection with Africa, they have to rely on Skyteam (KL, AF and DL with each their own flights via AMS or CDG), and SN now is going to tap in that very same market, giving potential customers a choice. And from what I've seen the product SN is going to deploy accros the pond (and beyond into Africa), is at least on par with whatever is offered by the competition.

I can agree that the loads aren't that exceptional when you just look at them without having the right context in mind, but we are talking about a route which hasn't even performed it's first revenue flight, thus still needs to mature. Except some very few isolated flights, have you ever seen a flight which was over - let's say - 85% LF months before it started? If a company should drop plans based on the loadfactor, months before the first mile is flown, we wouldn't see much new routes, would we?

Maybe they could dispatch an A319 across the pond and send a second plane behind with the luggage?

It could be just me

Probably.

but I get this feeling that they're doing everything they can to bring the company down, perhaps so that LH can restart Africa from FRA or MUC? As long as SN is around, LH can't do that, but when almost all the money is gone and the company is borderline insolvent, they can buy the remaining stake for next to nothing, repaint the A330's refurbished at the expense of the SN Airholding, send them to FRA or MUC and take-over the African bases.
They can then pretend that they saved part of the company by rehiring some of the staff in Germany, instead of being accused of asset-stripping the company. Good PR.

I get this feeling that LH is in for a Gordon Gekko trick and SN is plying the role of Blue Star.

Nonsense. If LH would have such scenario in mind, they will fail. LH wouldn't be able to compeed with AFKLM since, with LH absent, pax from the BRU market, would just go to CDG of AMS to fly to Africa. LH knows that and bought SN to counter the growing African presence of AFKLM.

I agree that SN has to turn the tide if they want LH to fully take over the company, but LH didn't buy SN only to take over the African ops and move them to FRA/MUC like you imply.

[convair]

Mr_Boeing mentioned 25000 tickets sold; if these are return tickets, it would be equivalent to 3 months' flights at 100% L/F, which is not bad.

Can someone clarify what the 25000 tickets actually are? One-way or return.

[Flanker]

Nonsense. If LH would have such scenario in mind, they will fail. LH wouldn't be able to compeed with AFKLM since, with LH absent, pax from the BRU market, would just go to CDG of AMS to fly to Africa. LH knows that and bought SN to counter the growing African presence of AFKLM.

How so? what did LH's purchase contribute to SN's African network in a way that it countered or counters the African presence of AF/KLM. In 3 years, one extra widebody?
Plus I don't see why LH would be absent at all, they can develop their own network much better from FRA.

I find it highly insulting to post something that doesn't have any meaning after accusing of nonsense

You just seem to put down every step SN takes and for me, not even a regular reader - let alone poster - on this forum, it gets pretty anoying. Everybody is in title of his opinion, but you just seem to hope SN will fail and go belly up just to prove that you were right,

Another insult. I think that I have pointed out enough times that my analysis of the airline points to very strange management decisions, to prove my point that maybe LH is planning to carry out euthanasia on SN to transfer Africa to Germany. So maybe LH is hoping for SN to go insolvent so they can justify and glorify the transfer of Africa to FRA?
At least, that's what all the signs tell me, I've been saying this for years!

When it happens, don't come saying that anyone could have predicted it.

So when is a good time to start your own transatlantic flights in the ongoing African 'rumble' with AFKLM? Let's face it... 9W is too risky to rely on, especially given the latest rumours of them moving to MUC. DL and AA are out of the questions. Remains UA. It's a reliable partner airline, but if loads are similar to those CO generated when they were a seperate company, you don't have to expect too much feeding from the UA flight since it's already pretty ful with O&D-pax. And unless UA is willing to deploy the elsewhere much needed 747 on EWR-BRU, you can't get anything bigger then todays 772.

Transatlantic is a big word. JFK is only one city as there are no onward connections for the moment.
The loads CO generated included SN's transfer pax by the way, so it's not pretty full with O&D. SN filled a large chunk of this plane with their transfer pax from EWR but also from other places who feed UA at EWR. But UA has many B757's, so they could have easily added an extra flight if the yields would have justified it.
If they were starting to ask for too much money for the transfer pax, SN could have started the route, but not with an A333. Instead of adding those 2 A332's, it would have been better to find 2 B757's to start JFK and new routes in Africa.

The only logical step to even improve loads on Africa bound flights, with pax coming from a region with a large African American community, is to start your own flight. For now, if those pax want a smooth one-stop connection with Africa, they have to rely on Skyteam (KL, AF and DL with each their own flights via AMS or CDG), and SN now is going to tap in that very same market, giving potential customers a choice. And from what I've seen the product SN is going to deploy accros the pond (and beyond into Africa), is at least on par with whatever is offered by the competition.

Which is good in the long term, if you knew that one day the airline would turn big profits.
You ought to reconsider your point of view by keeping in mind that money could run out in as early as 2012/2013. Would you still invest in such a risky and expensive adventure that MIGHT result in long-term advantages?

Mr_Boeing mentioned 25000 tickets sold; if these are return tickets, it would be equivalent to 3 months' flights at 100% L/F, which is not bad.

Can someone clarify what the 25000 tickets actually are? One-way or return.

In ticketing terms, a ticket is a pass that is exchangeable for one boarding pass for one single flight.
If you have several itineraries printed on one ticket format paper, that's a receipt, not a ticket in the pure sense (although many airlines and travel agents call it a ticket).

Return ticket is a term of common and marketing usage, but they don't exist, physically they are separate tickets.
The article is on luchtvaartnieuws.nl, it states 90 flights.
For a daily service, that's 45 days.

I hope that answers your question.

[LJ]

Some South American route however, seems like a better target to me, or why not, the Caribbean: of the 3 big airline groups in Europe, LH is the only one totally absent in this region: this could even turn out to be a second niche of theirs, if it works well!

Only problem with the Caribbean is which airport to fly to? Maybe SN should start PTY, but then, would LH allow this?

You ought to reconsider your point of view by keeping in mind that money could run out in as early as 2012/2013. Would you still invest in such a risky and expensive adventure that MIGHT result in long-term advantages?

The question is whether SN has many other options. They've committed themselves to 2 new A332s which fly to somewhere. If they don't have the necessary approvals for their African ops, you must keep your planes in the sky. Though, I'm not so sure if JFK is a good idea, it's very difficult to see what other options SN has.

The only logical step to even improve loads on Africa bound flights, with pax coming from a region with a large African American community, is to start your own flight.

To be honesty, this is not correct. SN and UA have ATI between the US and as such it doesn't matter if SN or UA operates the flight.

[Inquirer]

I find it highly insulting to post something that doesn't have any meaning after accusing of nonsense

Just because someone doesn't share your belief, doesn't automatically make that an insult.

Another insult.

Ut supra

Maybe LH is planning to carry out euthanasia on SN to transfer Africa to Germany. So maybe LH is hoping for SN to go insolvent so they can justify and glorify the transfer of Africa to FRA?
At least, that's what all the signs tell me, I've been saying this for years!

Why wouldn't Lufthansa have done so right away then?

Surely, Lufthansa could have set up their own operations to Africa without all the hastle of pretending to first buy Brussels and then wait a few years for them to fail? With €65M they'd go a long way, not to mention it would go much faster too. Also, just where does the transfer of the Swiss flights to Cameroon fit into that plan????

If they were starting to ask for too much money for the transfer pax, SN could have started the route, but not with an A333. Instead of adding those 2 A332's, it would have been better to find 2 B757's to start JFK and new routes in Africa.

And setting up another fleet (or alternatively rolling over an entire existing fleet even) isn't going to cost them a lot of time/money/efford too, you think?

Flying a smaller plane is a always a good method to limit the commercial risks, but is always seem to come with the higher seat costs too: how would you convince people to pay extra for a B.air flight to make good for that?

Given the fact the 757 isn't exactly the most comfortable plane to cross the Atlantic Ocean on (I have experience with it on AA, never again, thank you!) and the large competition on the route to JFK, a 757 is a bad idea for a route like BRU-JFK: too much competition which can undercut you on price while still offering more comfort.

keep in mind that money could run out in as early as 2012/2013. Would you still invest in such a risky and expensive adventure that MIGHT result in long-term advantages?

I'd say JFK is about as low risk as they get!
If they can't make JFK work somehow, they'd better forget about any other transatlantic route completely as any other alternative is far more risky and needs even more time to yield any results.

In ticketing terms, a ticket is a pass that is exchangeable for one boarding pass for one single flight.
If you have several itineraries printed on one ticket format paper, that's a receipt, not a ticket in the pure sense (although many airlines and travel agents call it a ticket).
Return ticket is a term of common and marketing usage, but they don't exist, physically they are separate tickets.
I hope that answers your question.

So basically you don't know exactly what it means either?
Since there's no guidance and no explanation coming with the figure, it could mean just as well "return tickets" as it could mean "one-way tickets": it all depends on the background of the source, which sadly isn't mentioned here, thus leaving us in the dark really.

[Inquirer]

Some South American route however, seems like a better target to me, or why not, the Caribbean: of the 3 big airline groups in Europe, LH is the only one totally absent in this region: this could even turn out to be a second niche of theirs, if it works well!

Only problem with the Caribbean is which airport to fly to? Maybe SN should start PTY, but then, would LH allow this?

Oh, it was just a wild idea of mine, pointing out that whereas KLM/Air France and BritishAirways/Iberia are both fairly strong it that region, Lufthansa is competely absent from it.
I know this is mainly due to lack of colonial ties, but still, if demand (and yield) from Europe to the Carribean is sufficiently high, there might be an opportunity.
But don't worry, I won't push it, as my idea is not based on "sound analysis" (sic): it was just a wild idea I floated on a lazy Saturday afternoon.

SN and UA have ATI between the US and as such it doesn't matter if SN or UA operates the flight.

Yeah, but the point made here several times is that UA may not be very willing to add extra capacity on let's say its EWR-BRU only to fill the onward flights from Brussels so if Brussels Airlines wants to fill the empty seats on their growing number of African flights with the many Americans that it knows are eager for alternatives to Air France/KLM, then there's no other option but to go and get them, is there?

[Flanker]

I hope that answers your question.


So basically you don't know exactly what it means either?

Get some English classes and a new pair of glasses.

Why wouldn't Lufthansa have done so right away then?

Surely, Lufthansa could have set up their own operations to Africa without all the hastle of pretending to first buy Brussels and then wait a few years for them to fail? With €65M they'd go a long way, not to mention it would go much faster too. Also, just where does the transfer of the Swiss flights to Cameroon fit into that plan????

To set up such a network takes huge resources, much more than 65M.
It also takes a lot of time.
LH may have spent 65M for SN, but they already got a big chunk of that back through LH Technik and other contracts. Plus now they are alone on the FRA and ZRH flights, no competition anymore and that's big money.

The transfer of the Cameroon flights buys LH some time, time SN doesn't have.
It's a small sacrifice considering that in a scenario wherein Africa goes to FRA, it's unlikely that Cameroon flights would have stayed in ZRH in the first place.

And setting up another fleet (or alternatively rolling over an entire existing fleet even) isn't going to cost them a lot of time/money/efford too, you think?

Flying a smaller plane is a always a good method to limit the commercial risks, but is always seem to come with the higher seat costs too: how would you convince people to pay extra for a B.air flight to make good for that?

Given the fact the 757 isn't exactly the most comfortable plane to cross the Atlantic Ocean on (I have experience with it on AA, never again, thank you!) and the large competition on the route to JFK, a 757 is a bad idea for a route like BRU-JFK: too much competition which can undercut you on price while still offering more comfort.

Setting up a B757 fleet isn't that costly.
Technical know-how is there, parts are next doors at Sabena Technics, former EAT pilots and postholders are plenty. Much better than flying a half-empty A333 for 16 hours a day at cheap fares.
You take a A333, you slash the operational cost in half and you have an idea of the cost of a B757. A widebody isn't automatically cheaper to operate because it's bigger. The fuel burn of an A333 and leasing costs are almost exactly double that of the B757, for less than double the seating capacity.

You said yourself that the main goal is feeding to Africa. If you're planning on filling the airplane with feeding, why should you worry about competition on BRU-JFK or type of airplane?


You're not making much sense there, admit it.

[DeltaWiskey]

Apparently when you are logged out, the foe list doesn't work, so I got the chance to read the funny posts again. For the guys who don't know it yet, Flanker pretends to know everything, in fact he doesn't, not even close, certainly not about aviation (maybe about deepwater mirco organims, but I can't proof that).
He always asks to back up your statements when he doesn't agree, while he never ever does. When you come up with decent arguments or sources, he just ignores it, or says it is not true or the reality is different... It really is a one way communication, I'm not going discuss with him any further until he (finally) backs up his statements.

[Inquirer]

Get some English classes and a new pair of glasses.

Talking about insults...

to set up such a network takes huge resources, much more than 65M. It also takes a lot of time.

Yet, if I were to believe you in another topic, Brussels Airlines' long haul network is complete crap: 5 inefficient A330s doing low frequency tiangulars!?!

Surely something like that can't be of much value, nor can it be very difficult to duplicate and improve on it while you're at it, can it?

What is it going to be now?

You're not making much sense there, admit it.

I may not be indeed, yet are you, little boy?

BTW, care to finally aswer the one single question which always make you go into hiding right away: what is your real world job (supposing you have one)?

[Inquirer]

Apparently when you are logged out, the foe list doesn't work, so I got the chance to read the funny posts again.

The foe list is not a good solution, simply because it's medication for the wrong patient!

IMHO its high time that whoever posts abusive comments and personal insults on this forum should be banned: simply asking the victims not to read the comments any longer (and offer them technical tools to help them achieve that) isn't going to stop this disease from spreading.

As they say in French: "quand tous les dégoûtés s'en vont, il ne reste plus que les dégoûtants"
Surely that can't be the aim of the moderators?

[flightlover]

Just maybe, as the A333 and A332 use same common ld-3 uld formats they just want to have a uniform fleet in that sense. Not only passengers take a flight to America.

Don't forget that SN is growing on the freight side also.

[Conti764]

How so? what did LH's purchase contribute to SN's African network in a way that it countered or counters the African presence of AF/KLM. In 3 years, one extra widebody?

An improved cabin in both the European and long haul fleet? It might look a detail, but the current hard product SN offers is on par with that of all airlines in LH group for the European fleet and at least on par or maybe even better then the competition in the long haul fleet and thus delivers a much better first impression then the dated cabins they had before.

Besides, what did you expect LH to do when they took over SN? Give them ten widebodies and have them fly to every airport in Africa? It takes time to turn around an airline and SN is only now getting on par with the competition in their service. And even with worn outdated cabins many customers still complemented SN's service.

Swiss was a great success story for LH, but you cannot compare LX with SN. The former still had more routes even in rough times then SN did and had a completely different market then SN. Furthermore LX was taken over in good economic times, whilst LH taking 45% of SN shares happened amidst the first part of a huge recession and economic downturn.

Plus I don't see why LH would be absent at all, they can develop their own network much better from FRA.

Actually, for someone with so much knowledge of the aviation industry, it shouldn't really be hard to understand why LH taking over SN and expanding a network from BRU is a better option over building a network at FRA from scratch?

Building their own network from saturated FRA takes a lot more time, effort and money then to take over a company which established it's presence in Africa since over 80 years and has build up a valuable experience with flying to the dark continent. You can better serve a difficult market like Africa from an airport with a great African market and with an airline that has it's hub at that very same airport and a great experience and history in Africa.

Demolishing SN would mean handing over pax to AFKLM on a silver plate.

I find it highly insulting to post something that doesn't have any meaning after accusing of nonsense

You seem to be quickly insulted, no? While I am not the one who is blocked by half of this forum...

Another insult. I think that I have pointed out enough times that my analysis of the airline points to very strange management decisions, to prove my point that maybe LH is planning to carry out euthanasia on SN to transfer Africa to Germany. So maybe LH is hoping for SN to go insolvent so they can justify and glorify the transfer of Africa to FRA?
At least, that's what all the signs tell me, I've been saying this for years!

Like I've already pointed out: not gonna happen. LH has nothing to gain from barebacking SN.

Transatlantic is a big word. JFK is only one city as there are no onward connections for the moment.

A flight that crosses the Atlantic is a transatlantic, no? Even it is one flight.

The loads CO generated included SN's transfer pax by the way, so it's not pretty full with O&D. SN filled a large chunk of this plane with their transfer pax from EWR but also from other places who feed UA at EWR. But UA has many B757's, so they could have easily added an extra flight if the yields would have justified it.

Primo, BRU was one of CO's best performing routes, way before they joined with Star Alliance and started codesharing with SN. So wether O&D filled the cabin or not, CO didn't and UA doesn't need SN to fill their planes, thus there is no need to cater for a second daily flight.
Secundo, not all UA 757's are ETOPS certified.
Tertio, UA is being run by former CO management and they never just started sending planes to everywhere in the world without reason and certainly not just to please a codeshare partner.
Quatro, SN serves NYC as a starting point for connecting passengers to Africa, JFK is way more conveniently located within easy reach from The Bronx/Queens/Brooklyn, all three with a huge African American community whilst EWR would only be better reachable by the A.-American community of Manhattan and New Jersey. But surely, as a professional, you have taken this in account, didn't you?

If they were starting to ask for too much money for the transfer pax, SN could have started the route, but not with an A333. Instead of adding those 2 A332's, it would have been better to find 2 B757's to start JFK and new routes in Africa.

Here we go again... What is your fascination with narrow bodies on long haul flights? Sure, they are a true gem on thin long haul routes (the 757), but a logistical nightmare on flights where a fair amount of cargo space is needed like SN's African destination. Besides, in a soon to be all (or mainly) Airbus fleet, you would introduce two out of the box B757's, thus creating a very odd subfleet of only 2 planes?

Which is good in the long term, if you knew that one day the airline would turn big profits.
You ought to reconsider your point of view by keeping in mind that money could run out in as early as 2012/2013. Would you still invest in such a risky and expensive adventure that MIGHT result in long-term advantages?

Well, you need to take risks in todays highly competitive aviation industry. Every year wasted are a number of pax lost to the competition. You can't just stand at the sideline looking how AFKLM are taking away pax and consolidating a customer base in what could be a great market for SN.

I'd even go further and start looking into some Carribean destinations to start taking (little) bites out of AFKLM's niche. At this time virtually no one is offering competition to them in that particular routes and no company out of the LH group is flying direct flights between Europe and the Carribean.