TG: BRU not profitable, could be axed

[Stij]

I flew TG tfrom BRU o Hanoi and back gram Saigon via BKK. Worked perfectly!

Cheers,

Stij

[sn-remember]

You can always make a stop in CDG, FRA, MUC, IST, LHR or AMS. The fact is that tehre is a lot of suuply between Eurpoe and Thailand and given the economy in Thailand not much high yield traffic.
..
But why go via BKK if you can fly more efficient via FRA, LHR, CDG or AMS? It's not only the ME3 which compete with TG, its all the European airlines plus the Asian ones. Moreover, It wouldn't surpise me if Lufthansa's long haul LCC will start flying to BKK (not very good for TG).
..
Why is BRU so special for TG? Scandinavia is despite the growing competition from the ME3 still more interesting to TG than BRU as the options for those in Scandinavia are more limited. Paris is larger than BRU (hene the A380) and why they fly to LHR and FRA is obvious. BRU is not pivotable for TGs Europe plans thus retracting from BRU doesn't say much about TG in Europe.

TG is competing hard against the ME3+EU4
In terms of european market coverage, the EU4 come first, than the ME3, then the SEA3 (tg,mh,si)
MH is already being ousted, SI are still there for a while, TG is a prey.
BRU IMO is a test for them. BRU is a proeminent 2nd tier hub like mxp or fco, all three being under the axe scrutiny. ANd I say it's a major step back, network policy wise. 1st tier hubs could very well eventually be considered unprofitable as well.
On Scandinavia, which used to be TG's bread and butter, they are also loosing market share. To me it's telling TG needs to compete more effectively on the EU market or they are doomed to end up like an anecdotal player.

[LJ]

BRU IMO is a test for them. BRU is a proeminent 2nd tier hub like mxp or fco, all three being under the axe scrutiny. ANd I say it's a major step back, network policy wise. 1st tier hubs could very well eventually be considered unprofitable as well.

Yet there is a big difference between BRU and all the other European destinations as TG has been flying to all the other destinations and BRU is a relative new destination (and they knew that they were up to the ME3 as QR and EY were already flying to BRU prior to TGs arrival). The real test for TG will be Scandinavia. If they cannot retain profitability there, the furture for TGs European flights will look not so good (and we can expect that it will be reduced to FRA, MUC, CDG and LHR only).

Is everybody forgetting the Philippines? There must be over a million Filipinos in Western Europe, not counting their European-born children and naturalized Filipinos. Whether that is enough to sustain links between Europe and the Philippines through Thailand is a question I don't know the answer to, but I do know that every flight I ever took towards the Philippines was always full.

You do now that yield are very low and that competition in this market is fierce (hence why KL decided to make MNL a one-stop instead on nonstop)? Indeed, the passengers are there, but they don't pay much.

[thalenoi]

BRU-BKK is a route that has potential ..
I know lots of people who wouldn't consider a stop in the gulf on a 12 hrs route. Too much hassle .. and fatigue plays a role.
Add a nice enough Y service and a not too heavy a premium for the unique non-stop offering.
However if they want to lure the business pax, they should go daily.
And synchronise the flight with the various feeding banks in BKK and BRU, both in the star alliance.
Heck, on SIN alone you have quite a healthy demand from BRU, not mentioning HKG.
Indeed.. starting a route is always costly and countering the cannibalisation from the ME carriers is a huge challenge. But if they can't make BRU work, I am very skeptical about the future of their european network as a whole.
They might end up like other carriers, serving a ME hub and that's it. See QF, AZ, MH in the near future etc ..
I'm sure changing the schedule, the a/C (a smaller frame like the 788 ?) and going daily together with better pricing and marketing could do the trick ?

I fly 2x year BKK-BRU in business and I will not pay TG prices of 140K Baht.
This year I will switch from EY to QR (had an unsolved problem with EY so I already booked and paid my 2 2015 trips on QR, by by EY gold status) I pay around 2k euro for my business class trip for 5 years now, was around 1500 euro before.
The only positive point to TG is they recently fly B777/300 with lay flat seats, before that they were nogo anyway with their lousy business class.
I do like the ME stop over, 12h engine noise is too much, need a walk, decent pee and business lounges are really good lately, I often eat in the lounge, less on the plane, I also can sleep a max of 4h on long haul, thus can sleep 2x4h on BKK-BRU.
As for *A cheap TG fares gives you zero miles.
With the euro down at 36B I might consider flying cattle class and will compare TG with ME prices, wait for 2016 and euro vs THB rate.

And seriously, TG management are a bunch of idiots, too many free loaders flying TG.
It is time to clean-up that company.

[RoMax]

A lot of people hate flights of let's say about 10 hours and prefer a transfer (even when it's a long one, and the ME carriers use long lay-overs for premium pax. to offer them a free hotel room anyway, or at least a luxurious lounge). Combine that with the very competitive prices of the MEB3 and their great on-board service, and it's not difficult to figure out why it's so difficult for a carrier like Thai or Malaysian.

Indeed not everyone wants to fly the MEB3 and indeed they are not always the cheapest, but that doesn't mean they are a huge threat to the future of long haul routes of carriers like MH and TG. SQ has the advantage of their outstanding reputation (I just got reminded about that a few weeks ago in the departures hall of IST, a crew of SQ walked towards check-in looking great as always, I have never seen so many other passengers looking and pointing at a passing crew, it doesn't matter if you are familiar with aviation or not, who doesn't know the Singapore Girl's), but SQ is also suffering from harsh ME competition, certainly because SIN also relies so much on transfer traffic.

[Stij]

Not being a regular Asia flyer (apart from China) but I had my share of long haul in Y and I would like to add a few things:

EK can be cheap, I'll avoid them as long as a 10 abreast 777 is involved. KL and AF I avoid as well on 777. QR and EY I would consider.
If non-stop is available, I'll take it... even if it's more expensive... If not, and I would have to make a connection, I prefer a short-haul and then a long-haul over two (shorter) long haul flights.
Also, I'll avoid major detours, EK has a reasonable connection to CPT, but I'll never take it...
I absolutely hate 8 hour layovers, even if a hotel is available as before you're in the hotel and are set to get a nap, you can almost get up again for your connection.

But my preferences aren't what everybody prefers: our maid is Thai and when she flies home, she always flies via the gulf because she prefers two shorter flights over one long.

Cheers,

Stij

[RoMax]

I absolutely hate 8 hour layovers, even if a hotel is available as before you're in the hotel and are set to get a nap, you can almost get up again for your connection.

Several airports offer in-terminal hotels (such as 'The Airport Hotel' of Doha's new airport), you lose little time with such hotels and more than worth it for a long layover.

But indeed as you say, everyone has different preferences and in these cases it's mostly the advantage of price, high quality on-board service (altough indeed as you say the 10-abreast 77W configuration of EK is a disadvantage, it will become increasingly difficult to avoid these, especially when the 777X enters service where the 10-abreast is standard configuration, altough in this case the cabin is slightly wider compared to the standard T7), and the fact that many people prefer to split up a ULH flight into two relatively short long haul flights.

[Stij]

Several airports offer in-terminal hotels (such as 'The Airport Hotel' of Doha's new airport), you lose little time with such hotels and more than worth it for a long layover.

Don't get me wrong, if I would have such a layover, I would take an hotel, but I try to avoid such layovers...

Cheers,

Stij

[regi]

OK, referring to my question about TG trouble, now I understand better.
TG in a whole is in trouble, it is not just the BRU destination.
But that is already a very long time. ( I don't know if TG has ever been profitable )

Wat is absolutely true, and even ashaming wealthy and well educated Thai nationals, even state officials, are the free tickets for "friends". The current political situation cannot solve this because history has shown that every military coup has encouraged corruption/ nepotism. ( despite most coups were excused by the military to end corruption...) But TG suffered already from this behaviour before the recent coup .

Positive:
most passengers from Thai origin using TG towards Thailand don't mind to pay the bit higher fee. They hate plane changes.
Extremely positive: the cheap connection to domestic destinations, without the hassle of luggage allowance, and with the security that your ticket isn't void in case the flight from BRU has delay.

[Boeing767copilot]

Thai Airways revenue down 2% – financial highlights for 12 months ended 31-Dec-2014:

Total revenue: THB203,889 million (USD6279 million), -1.8% year-on-year;
Total operating revenue: THB188,367 million (USD5801 million), -8.7%;
Passenger and excess baggage: THB154,881 million (USD4770 million), -10.1%;
Freight and mail: THB23,601 million (USD726.8 million), -3.7%;
Total costs: THB220,627 million (USD6795 million), stable;
Fuel: THB79,231 million (USD2440 million), -1.6%;
Labour: THB31,274 million (USD963.1 million), -5.5%;
Profit (loss) before tax: (THB16,738 million) (USD515.5 million), compared to a loss of THB12,929 million (USD398.2 million) in p-c-p;
Net profit (loss): (THB15,612 million) (USD480.8 million), compared to a loss of THB12,047 million (USD371.0 million) in p-c-p;
Passenger numbers: 19.1 million, -11.2%;
Passenger load factor: 68.9%, -5.2 ppts;
Passenger yield: THB2.66 (USD 8.2 cents), +0.4%;
Cargo volume: 613,915 tons, -6.4%;
Cargo yield: THB9.22 (USD 28.4 cents), +0.4%;
Total assets: THB307,267 million (USD9463 million);
Cash and cash equivalents: THB23,347 million (USD719.0 million);
Total liabilities: THB265,971 million (USD8191 million). [more - original PR]
*Based on the average conversion rate at USD1 = THB32.4712

[chineseboy]

If TG leaves BRU and the departing of 9W in favor of AUH, BRU will become a more dull airport than it is already...

[White Light]

If TG leaves BRU and the departing of 9W in favor of AUH, BRU will become a more dull airport than it is already...

For those who had not realised, yet, Brussels is just a large European provincial town moderatley attractive for world class airlines. The presence of bureaucratic international organisations (EU, NATO for instance) does not change the dullness and uglyness of the city of the uglyness of the outside look and infrastructure of its airport.

Add to that that Belgians have always been unable to convince travellers of Belgium tourist assets.

Add to that also that SN's shareholders don't want to invest a penny in the airline, not even LH which will either buy the remain 55 % shares of SN and impose a limit to SN's growth to West and Central Africa, or will put its 45% up for sale.

Nothing but dull prospects like the weather in this country.

If SN breaks even or perhaps make a profit is will not be due to shareholder apathy and the management's handicraft skills with the means at hand, but due to cheap oil.

If 9W leaves BRU it wil be due to Etihad's global strategy and reshuffle.

If TG leaves if will be due to poor management at TG.

All the odds are against us

[Flanker2]

For those who had not realised, yet, Brussels is just a large European provincial town moderatley attractive for world class airlines. The presence of bureaucratic international organisations (EU, NATO for instance) does not change the dullness and uglyness of the city of the uglyness of the outside look and infrastructure of its airport.

Add to that that Belgians have always been unable to convince travellers of Belgium tourist assets.

Add to that also that SN's shareholders don't want to invest a penny in the airline, not even LH which will either buy the remain 55 % shares of SN and impose a limit to SN's growth to West and Central Africa, or will put its 45% up for sale.

Nothing but dull prospects like the weather in this country.

If SN breaks even or perhaps make a profit is will not be due to shareholder apathy and the management's handicraft skills with the means at hand, but due to cheap oil.

If 9W leaves BRU it wil be due to Etihad's global strategy and reshuffle.

If TG leaves if will be due to poor management at TG.

All the odds are against us

What a great summary.
There are good prospects for developping aviation as a major source of income for Belgium (or any West-European country for that matter), though it takes determination, government cooperation, a good strategy and even some arrogance.
SN is slowly growing back to Sabena's size when it went bankrupt, though if you count subsidiaries like DAT, Citybird and Sobelair, they still have a long way to go.
IMO with a good concept and good execution, given the current open skies in place, a well-run airline can bankrupt the likes of LH, AF-KL and BA in no time. In my view all these airlines appear extremely lazy and passive.

Last week I flew TK NRT-IST-BRU and it was full of African connections flying IST-BRU. At least 15 pax on a B738, and that's only the ethnic ones that I could recognise. The worst part? Even on the NRT-IST B77W leg there were at least 10 pax connecting to Africa of whom several in J, as I saw them checking in their multiple luggages at NRT.
That's 25 potential pax that SN has lost to TK on the limited network that I flew, and it's owed purely to lazyness, passiveness. If SN ran a watertight operation to Africa with frequencies, there is no way that TK could develop that network like they did.

I think that EU regulation banning government investment in airlines is distorting competition in favor of non-EU airlines. The EU creates 2 new problems with every problem they solve.

TG is on the other hand the perfect example of why governments should leave airline management to the pro's instead of getting involved directly, like Sabena (or most privatised airlines). Governments should limit themselves to pumping in capital or subsidise them.

You know, if you want to subsidise airlines indirectly, there are much better ways than pumping "security money" through the airport.
Just hire an army of government employees and have them fly B.Flex (or whatever it's called now) 10 times a week to carry "sensitive documents" all over Europe and even longhaul, and have them do clerikal work during their trips. You can then pump hundreds of millions without undergoing EU scrutinity.
A bit like Bpost and its government contracts. If they're not doing it already...

[Stij]

And now back to TG!

Let's hope they see the case form BRU-BKK and will resolve their internal issues!

Cheers,

Stij

[Atlantis]

Not only TG will reduce or axe flights to Europe and other parts in the world, also Malaysia will do it with cutting 10% of the offer. Amsterdam is not sure if they will see Malaysia back.

[jan_olieslagers]

What a load of nonsense.

For those who had not realised, yet, Brussels is just a large European provincial town moderatley attractive for world class airlines. The presence of bureaucratic international organisations (EU, NATO for instance) does not change the dullness and uglyness of the city of the uglyness of the outside look and infrastructure of its airport.

As if anyone will buy a high-yield ticket to visit a good looking airport (if there could be any norm for that) or even a beautiful city.

Add to that that Belgians have always been unable to convince travellers of Belgium tourist assets.

Take a walk on the main square in Gent, Brugge, Mechelen, Leuven, Antwerpen, Brussel on a summer afternoon and count the number of cameras. Report figures and we'll talk again.

[LJ]

Not only TG will reduce or axe flights to Europe and other parts in the world, also Malaysia will do it with cutting 10% of the offer. Amsterdam is not sure if they will see Malaysia back.

You mean, if MH continues flying to AMS as they still fly to AMS.

BTW going back to the original article I asume that we'll know this month what (or if) Thai will axe more routes besides Moscow and Madrid (they said 4th fiscal quarter). What's promising is that currenlty none of the routes listed has been axed and one route (Bangkok - Colombo) has seen a reduction in frequency, but an upgauge to an A330.

[White Light]

What a load of nonsense.

White Light" :For those who had not realised, yet, Brussels is just a large European provincial town moderatley attractive for world class airlines. The presence of bureaucratic international organisations (EU, NATO for instance) does not change the dullness and uglyness of the city of the uglyness of the outside look and infrastructure of its airport".

As if anyone will buy a high-yield ticket to visit a good looking airport (if there could be any norm for that) or even a beautiful city.

Honestly, I don't understand a word you're saying. I'm probably not intelligent enough because I am convinced that Brussels or Antwerp or any other Belgian city are not world cities.

Take a walk on the main square in Gent, Brugge, Mechelen, Leuven, Antwerpen, Brussel on a summer afternoon and count the number of cameras. Report figures and we'll talk again.

Read official statistics instead. Small countries like Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Czech Republic or Austria are doing better than Belgium.

And on a less official note, I've never seen a Belgian city quoted as a "preferred" world or even European destination.
http://www.businessinsider.com/tripadvi ... ?op=1&IR=T
http://www.tripadvisor.com/TravelersCho ... ns-cTop-g1
http://www.tripadvisor.com/TravelersCho ... ns-cTop-g4

Sorry, it is to some extend off topic, but not so much. Most non European tourists we see in Belgium landed in AMS, CDG, LHR or even FRA and make perhaps a quick visit to Belgium.

If TG and for instance the 4 Big NMEast carriers fly to Belgium, it's not to bring tourist here but to take Belgian tourist to destinations around the world. And TG has not got its act together.

[regi]

TG and Brussels:
at the TG website they present Brussels specifically in detail towards their Thai clientele:

เมืองหลวงของประเทศเบลเยี่ยมและเป็นศูนย์กลางของสหภาพยุโรป เป็นที่ตั้งของชุมชนฝรั่งเศสและชุมชนฟลามส์ บรัสเซลส์เป็นที่ตั้งขององค์กรระหว่างประเทศที่สำคัญหลายแห่ง ทำให้หลายประเทศมีสถานทูตในบรัสเซลส์ถึง 3 แห่ง

เบลเยี่ยมเป็นประเทศที่มีการแบ่งเขตของประชากรที่พูดภาษาดัตช์ (ทางเหนือ) และภาษาฝรั่งเศส (ทางใต้)​ โดยมีเส้นแบ่งเขตที่ชัดเจน บรัสเซลส์นั้นอยู่ในเขตของดัทช์ แต่ภาษาอย่างเป็นทางการนั้นใช้ทั้งสองภาษา โดยส่วนใหญ่เป็นภาษาฝรั่งเศส

TG cannot live from the 50,000 Belgian tourists/year to Thailand.
As most national carriers, they look also towards their own customer base. A good and extreme example of such a TG destination is Macau. This is clearly not to bring Macau tourists towards Thailand. But to bring Thai people towards the gambling facilities.
TG knows already out of the past that the Thai tourist industry is a very low paying, season depending market.
The staff at the Brussels office has gone through very difficult times and job insecurity . I congratulate them for their excellent work they did in the period that TG was not more flying towards BRU. I may guess that their continous work, reports, studies have contributed to convince the board in Bangkok to re-open the route.
If the route would be axed again, it will certainly not be because of lazyniness at Avenue de la toison d'or.
Thumbs up for Katrien and her staff.
I just received their new prices for the low season. Yes, I know that you can get 150 € - 200 € cheaper. But +- 650 € with TG, come on guys, this is a give away. Recalculated to Belgian francs, and compared to the prices of 25 years ago, this is bloody 10,000 bfr ( 250 € ) cheaper than in the past !
And for the real cheap charlies, or the people who can arrange their travelling time:
4115 Thai baht BKK-London LHR , yeah, one way. Just look at the super deals.
And if you fly by group of min 4 persons e.g. to LHR, it costs 16,000 baht round way.

The sad part is that whatever the working ants do, the losses keep on coming because of mismanagment.
I love TG, I like it, I promote it and I stand by them.No, I don't work for TG. No, I don't receive any goodies from TG. No free upgrades. But I still love it.

[capetown]

I just received their new prices for the low season. Yes, I know that you can get 150 € - 200 € cheaper. But +- 650 € with TG, come on guys, this is a give away.

Yups, and I purchased a ticket for my wife yesterday - first via TG's Brussels office call center, where a friendly lady told me that flights were almost fully booked for the Easter holiday, then managed to find one seat left for the intended departure date, and finally suggested that I would book myself online for that flight as there would be a 100 EUR price difference (cheaper online). Result : 681 EUR BRU-BKK-BRU. A very reasonable price (and yes, I looked for gulf carrier alternatives but couldn't find an offer that beat TG's). I'd really wish to see them stay , and expand, at BRU. Even if the current management back in the land of smiles seems crap.