Lufthansa buys the remaining 55% of Brussels Airlines

[convair]

Hub or no hub at BRU?

A few points to keep in mind imho:

1. BRU has been slowly growing over the last few years.
2. SN has been growing more rapidly than BRU over the last few years; hence the market share of SN has been growing.
3. Even though SN's market share at BRU is still lower than its sisters' in their own home hubs, it seems there is a possibility for SN to further increase its share. How?
3.1. Increase its long haul offer; too many important destinations are not served directly from BRU.
3.2. Feed that additional offer with more european/regional flights.
4. LH has the means to make it happen, and to make it happen quickly. I find it stupid that, by declaring SN a point-to-point company, LH/EW seems to officially forego a substantial part of its growth potential.
6. When comparing market shares in the home hubs of SN's sister, as well as their transit passengers numbers, one should take into account the fact that SN does not have inner-country transit, contrary to its sisters (e.g. Klagenfurt-Vienna for OS or Leipzig-Frankfurt for LH). I don't know how many passengers these internal flights carry, but it may not be negligeable.

[sn-remember]

Not in my book .. Would you have a reference ?

Probably the easiest (semi-public) source to have a nice (monthly) overview per airline is the Flightglobal database (with subscription). But to give an example which you could easily look up yourself: look at all flights to/from LHR under a United flight code. Many of those are codeshares, including a number of EW/4U operated routes. Same with Air Canada for example at LHR and ZRH. All in all monthly there are a few thousand EW/4U operated flights on which other LH Group airlines as well as NH, UA and AC have a codeshare. Only NH is DUS-only focussed (except for the BRU-STR route, where they feed into STR via BRU).

Lhr has just one dus flight codesharing between ua/ac and ew. I see also zrh-dus, just one single ew flight among many that is codeshared by ac/lx/lh. But as I mentioned previously, dus is the only place where there is some (not that many) codeshare...
Otherwise nothing much to see ito codeharing involving ew/4u ..
For instance the zrh-cgn ew flight is the only option on the route but no lx codeshare is registered. Same for vie-cgn and os, no os codeshare.
It shoudn't be a surprise, lcc's are not codesharing oriented (deemed too costly)
On the other hand, as you mentioned, l/hs need feeding (example Norwegian) however if you look at the 3 ew longhauls departing today from cgn to the sunny destinations vra/hkt/mru, I see no lh codeshare from muc for instance, a route only served by lh and their only one at cgn. (there is an additional rotation by ab to be precise ..)
Soo maybe we do not use the same tools, mine is flightstats.

[RoMax]

For instance the zrh-cgn ew flight is the only option on the route but no lx codeshare is registered. Same for vie-cgn and os, no os codeshare.

?? Have another look, the morning flight from ZRH to CGN has codeshares from Swiss, United, Air Canada and Lufthansa (LH codeshare is not daily and on Saturday there seems to be no codeshare, but on all other days there are), the rest of the daily flights have an LX codeshare.
Same with the VIE-CGN flights, except on Saturday they all have a codeshare of at least OS, in some cases also LH.

Lhr has just one dus flight codesharing between ua/ac and ew.

Maybe on a Saturday (didn't check), but for example on Monday there are 13 EW/4U flights to DUS, CGN, HAM, STR and TXL from LHR that have a UA codeshare. For AC I quickly counted 11 on the same 5 destinations on Monday (out of LHR as well).

I'm not going to look them all up, but I think I made my point. No codeshares are not as widespread as with network carriers, but EW/4U is definitely very far from being a normal LCC on this (and many other) aspect(s) with a relatively significant number of flights which are served with feeding from partner carriers. What they don't do is selling themselves on other airlines' flights via codeshares, which would be a next step in cooperation of course.

On the other hand, as you mentioned, l/hs need feeding (example Norwegian) however if you look at the 3 ew longhauls departing today from cgn to the sunny destinations vra/hkt/mru, I see no lh codeshare from muc for instance, a route only served by lh and their only one at cgn. (there is an additional rotation by ab to be precise ..)

Indeed for the moment on these purely holiday destinations there are no codeshares and they are not necessary, but at a certain point just like on intra-EU there will be growth beyond the pure holiday market and for that to succeed they will definitely come to a point that feeding from other carriers will be welcome. BUT don't forget that although there are no codeshares from other carriers on their current long haul flights, there are numerous connection possibilities within their own network (just like Norwegian has at it's nordic bases, that's why they are looking at feeding from other carriers initially at the bases where they don't have such vast networks from their own - with the difference that they seem to look at interlining in an initial phase, rather than codeshares).

I'm not sure what you try to prove here... No EW/4U is not a network carrier, but yes they have codeshares on tens of flights per day throughout their network and they have connectivity within their own network. Is it a priority for them? No, but it would make their lives a whole lot more difficult on many routes if they wouldn't have those codeshares so yes to a certain extent they also rely on them to/from certain key markets.

There is a name for that: a hybrid carrier. Unfortunately LH and EW/4U themselves haven't realised that yet.
SN is a hybrid carrier more at the other side of the spectrum (much more premium aspects, a bigger focus on business markets and premium long haul markets and a mure more connectivity oriented operation in cooperation with a large number of airlines). But who cares? With SN integrating in Eurowings Group, the network development focus might shift even more to optimising aircraft utilisation and serving O&D markets rather than 'purely' optimising connectivity, but I don't see any sign on why they should have to give up their codeshares and other partnerships. The point is to grow in BRU, both long and short haul, that growth has to come from somewhere and as I said yesterday SN has the relative luxery of having such a home market, but at the same time feeding remains crucial for the long haul network (btw keep in mind that most transfers to/from SN's long haul network still come from within their own network, complemented by important codeshares from mainly UA, AC and LH...where have I seen that before? ).

[sn-remember]

Call me finicky but I like to check things and use the precise wording ..
Flightstats will not show the interline agreements soo that's what probably confused me ...
Indeed it sounds logical they would offer some interlining agreement when necessary with partner airlines. But it has a cost i.t.o. ground handling and flight synchronisation.
Codesharing i.e. selling tickets on another metal while having a 'virtual' flight number attached, is something you agree they don't do (yet ?) .. except in dus because they have to.
The full service carriers do not codeshare willingly with lcc's probably because the service levels are considered too different ?
..
About the p2p vs hub model ...
I think the major carriers also have developped some hybrid feature to be effective on different markets .. AF/KL for instance have their sunny destinations operated with poor service and cramped cabin and no or little feed. TP like EI or AY offer a lowcost (mostly) alongside full service product. They operate mainly a hub model with some limited p2P (significant for EI).
That model which you call hybrid is probably the way to go for SN ..
Codesharing is the effective way to integrate sister airlines, interlining is not enough. That's what an alliance is intended for.. an integration tool for the benefit of the member airlines and their passengers.

[RoMax]

Call me finicky but I like to check things and use the precise wording ..
Flightstats will not show the interline agreements soo that's what probably confused me ...
Indeed it sounds logical they would offer some interlining agreement when necessary with partner airlines. But it has a cost i.t.o. ground handling and flight synchronisation.
Codesharing i.e. selling tickets on another metal while having a 'virtual' flight number attached, is something you agree they don't do (yet ?) .. except in dus because they have to.

All the examples I just gave are full codeshares (and visible in Flightstats, I checked specifically in Flightstats to be sure I was giving examples that are visible there)...They are NOT just interline agreements (which are not visible under a 'marketing carrier' flight number like codeshares)...
The only difference being that at EW/4U codeshares are only in 1 direction: partner carriers putting their codes on EW/4U operated flights, and not EW/4U putting its code on flights operated by other carriers (the same as SN has with NH, which puts its code on a large number of SN flights, but SN doesn't have a codeshare on BRU-NRT (although that's only because they can't for the moment). So no I don't agree with what you say that they don't do codesharing (yet)...

About the p2p vs hub model ...
I think the major carriers also have developped some hybrid feature to be effective on different markets .. AF/KL for instance have their sunny destinations operated with poor service and cramped cabin and no or little feed. TP like EI or AY offer a lowcost (mostly) alongside full service product. They operate mainly a hub model with some limited p2P (significant for EI).
That model which you call hybrid is probably the way to go for SN ..

As I described yesterday, SN's model already goes a lot further in that hybrid-thinking than any of the other airlines you name as examples (except maybe EI) and is more focussed at serving the O&D market (except long haul, where the majority of the pax are not O&D).

Codesharing is the effective way to integrate sister airlines, interlining is not enough. That's what an alliance is intended for.. an integration tool for the benefit of the member airlines and their passengers.

And codesharing is what they do and will continue to do so, just like EW/4U is also already doing!

[sn-remember]

@RoMax
Very strange .. Flightstats was definitely not previously showing me the codeshares on cgn-zrh/vie 4U flights (I tried several times so I am sure) and today yes it's displayed ... Also they were showing 2 flights/day and now 4 ... Maybe it's day related, not sure ..
So you are right they seem to codeshare on some routes (not only in dus) thank you for clarifying (and sorry for "nitpicking") ..

[Passenger]

(this a reply to a post in the topic "Brussels Airlines fleet renewal)

Now that SN is a 100% daughter of LH, all the decisions will have to be submitted to the LH Board for final approval.

Really? That's bad management! I would think that the SN Board (in which LH is represented anyway) would at least have some freedom to decide alone on matters of minor importance, e.g. less than €xxx,000. Of course, the purchase or leasing of planes for a long period does not fall in that category of decisions.

Here are the amounts, and the names of people who are allowed to take the decisions:

FR:
http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/tsv_pd ... 037534.pdf
NL:
http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/tsv_pd ... 037533.pdf

[convair]

(this a reply to a post in the topic "Brussels Airlines fleet renewal)

Now that SN is a 100% daughter of LH, all the decisions will have to be submitted to the LH Board for final approval.

Really? That's bad management! I would think that the SN Board (in which LH is represented anyway) would at least have some freedom to decide alone on matters of minor importance, e.g. less than €xxx,000. Of course, the purchase or leasing of planes for a long period does not fall in that category of decisions.

Here are the amounts, and the names of people who are allowed to take the decisions:

FR:
http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/tsv_pd ... 037534.pdf
NL:
http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/tsv_pd ... 037533.pdf

With the caveat that the people mentioned are allowed to sign, not necessarily to take the decisions. Main decisions will be taken by the board and will be implemented by the people on the lists according to their position in the company.
And, btw, double signature is an old tradition in belgian companies; british and US companies, among others, have mostly dropped that habit.
Sorry for the "nitpicking" but I believe it's better to avoid any misunderstandings in those sensible matters.