Brussels Airlines in 2020

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

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
sean1982
Posts: 3272
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by sean1982 »

Nice article from “de Tijd” about the corporate hypocrisy and the “we’re in this together” message they tried to portray.

The meme “Now we’re in this together, but when I had to pay 53€ for my suitcase I was alone” is used as a starting point.

Summary: the article is an opinion on how companies use the normal market strategy when things are good. In other words no flexibility towards the customer, not much goodwill, read our term and conditions ...

Now that they are in dire need, they try to get onto people’s emotions with this whole “we’re in this together” campaign which is essentially warming up public opinion to use OUR (tax)money to bail out their company while we get nothing in return.

According to the tijd this is a very risky (slightly deplorable) strategy that may change public opinion on a company (or sector even) for good. They use the banking crisis as an example.

I tend to agree with this article quite strongly

https://www.tijd.be/opinie/column/Vira ... e/10223881

oldblueeyes
Posts: 91
Joined: 13 Apr 2020, 12:44

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by oldblueeyes »

Flanker2 wrote: 01 May 2020, 01:33 What is great about the letter?
Spohr is begging for money at the same time as demanding that SN remains in the hands of LH.

This is ridiculous, the government should let LH save SN on its own, and if they don't, let it go insolvent and then nationalise it and rebuild it into a thriving carrier like KLM.

The government needs to put an end to the permanent survival mode of SN. Do you really want another 20 years of headlines "SN in trouble", "SN announces restructuring", etc...? We are tired of those headlines.
LH did not invest into SN under the "be profitable or no investments" motto.

LH had their chance and didn't take it, time to try something else.
You don't have the potential of a KLM - take is simple, geographically you're in the Middle of 4 hubs, 3 of them with consistent national markets as well. And none of the legacies in Paris, London, Frankfurt or Amsterdam went bankrupt.

The "new" SN was for more than a decade a regional carrier - with half of it's fleet consisting of AVRO's. It's nice to dream about KLM but the benchmark was rather Hop!.

Lufthansa is since 3 years the sole shreholder - till than they had a minority - so why did the other shareholders not invested enough?

The golden rule in Lufthansa is that each brand has to be able to pay for its planes. Swiss was earning money, everybody was happy as they decided to order more 773s than initially planned, as well as nobody was against them on having more 773 for the mainline and transfer older 343 that they still own to ramp up Edelweiss.

By the way - the 30 C-Series /A220 options Lufthansa has were initially dedicated to an all C-Series short haul fleet scenario for Brussels, as the local fleet was leased, what is not a typical LH policy. The reality is that locally there was not enough money earned.

So let's be realistic:
- whatever other big legacy might come, they would only use the location as feeder and high demand P2P
- a restart under local capital initiative would bring a much smaller, less connected company
- there would be no problem for Lufthansa to catch the cash cow routes on short haul and create quickly a decent Eurowings base as well as they could easily switch the African routes to another hub - incl. taking the planes with them

The whole industry has a drop in demand and even if it will recover, the "nw normal" predicted would mean a smaller market than currently. There will be no larger pie to ask for a larger share and take it fro organic growth - the cake for this decade will be smaller and those coming better out of the crisis might be agressive enough to eat a portion of the weaker players.

Passenger
Posts: 6860
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Passenger »

sean1982 wrote: 01 May 2020, 08:14 Nice article from “de Tijd” about the corporate hypocrisy and the “we’re in this together” message they tried to portray.

The meme “Now we’re in this together, but when I had to pay 53€ for my suitcase I was alone” is used as a starting point.

Summary: the article is an opinion on how companies use the normal market strategy when things are good. In other words no flexibility towards the customer, not much goodwill, read our term and conditions ...

Now that they are in dire need, they try to get onto people’s emotions with this whole “we’re in this together” campaign which is essentially warming up public opinion to use OUR (tax)money to bail out their company while we get nothing in return.

According to the tijd this is a very risky (slightly deplorable) strategy that may change public opinion on a company (or sector even) for good. They use the banking crisis as an example.

I tend to agree with this article quite strongly

https://www.tijd.be/opinie/column/Vira ... e/10223881
It's thanks to the above "...hypocryte we're in this together attitude..." that the whole Belgian aviation trade has been saved: Brussels Airlines, Air Belgium and TUI Airlines.

It's thanks to another "...hypocryte we're in this together attitude..." that the whole Belgian travel trade has been saved. From the smallest travel agent till the biggest Belgian (German owned) touroperator.

(I exclude Air Antwerp because they recieve a limited amount of deposits because their passengers don't book months in advance. Air Antwerp thus can survive with the general temporary unemployment.

Inquirer
Posts: 2088
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

sean1982 wrote: 01 May 2020, 08:14 Nice article from “de Tijd” about the corporate hypocrisy and the “we’re in this together” message they tried to portray.

(...)

I tend to agree with this article quite strongly

https://www.tijd.be/opinie/column/Vira ... e/10223881
It's impossible not to agree with the moral values portrayed in this article, but allow me to say it's highly philosophical and rather thin on any realistic substance; the author basically repeats the well-known fundamental issue with privatizing vital infrastructural elements of a society.

Realistically, what should have happened in 2008 then, according to the author?
Should we have let all privately owned banks collapse? That would have brought mass empoverishment over our population as basically everybody would have lost his life savings and our economy would have been ruined for a generation.
Or should they have been nationalized and kept as state banks forever, since it's indisputable you need high street banks to act as the monetary transfer mechanism between what the governing ECB decides as policy and what businesses and people act upon in their daily lives.

And related to today and to aviation in specific, should we let vital means of transportation an our economic infrastructure just go under, only to emerge from the crisis as a nation with very weakened or no connectivity to conduct our all important international trade and business through?
Or do we nationalize them and return to the landscape of the 1970s where you had 1 monopolistic state-owned player?

I think the reality is somewhere to be found in a pragmatic approach like we saw during the banking crisis, where governments provided the much needed financial aid to those who needed it in return for a correct financial compensation, be it through interest on a loan as was the case for KBC (a deal which turned out to be very luctrative for the Flemish Government which provided the bank with the required funds after the MR opposed to Belgium saving a 'flemish' bank btw!), or an annual dividend as a minority shareholder like is the case at BNP Paribas-Fortis.

People on the left will always cry foul over how 'tons of public money' were spent to save bankers or other fat cats, but easily forget that in the end both cases (KBC and Fortis) showed -and continue to show- they were public money very well spent as it significantly cushioned the financial and economic crisis that rolled over us all, saved tens of thousands of jobs of ordinary employees AND turned out have been a good public investment even in the end!
People on the right will easily parrot their idiological mantra of how free market mechanisms are not to be distorted, while forgetting that right now the market itself is disfunctional because there's no more demand whatsoever, so you somehow have to have goverment make sure that by the time demand is returning to the markets, the private offer will still be there in sufficiently large and diverse volumes to fully respond to it in order to stimulate the economy and not let it slide away into a recession.

In short: it's an appropriate article to read on May 1st, but as so much of what is said on such a symbolic day, it's largely disconnected from the daily realities of how an economy should be looked upon and structured for it to be optimally functional in the long term.

User avatar
lumumba
Posts: 1798
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 00:00
Location: brussels Europe

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by lumumba »

Flanker2 wrote: 01 May 2020, 01:33
lumumba wrote: 30 Apr 2020, 11:49
Yuqu12 wrote: 30 Apr 2020, 10:46 As much as I think that owing a blocking minority share or even the nationalisation of Brussels Airlines would be beneficial, I seriously doubt whether one of both will happen. Spohr doesn't want governments to become shareholders and LH doesn't want to give up SN to lose its control over Brussels as its backyard. The most realistic scenario would be a loan with guarantees (like employment but perhaps even more importantly the obligation that SN cannot lose its most important routes).
But taking into account the comments of our vice-prime minister De Croo in the Commission of Finance that it is far from certain that SN will receive aid, I'm starting to doubt whether SN will receive it. MoP Vandenbroucke wanted to know whether this would mean that there is the option that the government wanted to let SN go bankrupt but this question wasn't answered.
Today there is the plenary in the Chamber of Representatives with firstly a question round. It will be interesting to see whether someone will ask again whether SN will receive state aid, given the open letter published in De Tijd today.
But the open lettre is very positive I don't see the problem here.
After yesterday article in De Standaard where some economists and experts did the same.
Looks obvious to me that they will do it.
Yuqu12 wrote: 30 Apr 2020, 12:30 Yeah yeah that open letter is very positive indeed, but it changes the circumstances compared to the commission of finance since Tuesday. That's why I hope it is a trigger for some members of the parliament to ask questions to minister De Croo again and to put some pressure on the government.
What is great about the letter?
Spohr is begging for money at the same time as demanding that SN remains in the hands of LH.

This is ridiculous, the government should let LH save SN on its own, and if they don't, let it go insolvent and then nationalise it and rebuild it into a thriving carrier like KLM.

The government needs to put an end to the permanent survival mode of SN. Do you really want another 20 years of headlines "SN in trouble", "SN announces restructuring", etc...? We are tired of those headlines.
LH did not invest into SN under the "be profitable or no investments" motto.

LH had their chance and didn't take it, time to try something else.
I don't understand Spohr has nothing to do with this open letter he did not sign it!!!
Hasta la victoria siempre.

User avatar
Yuqu12
Posts: 476
Joined: 04 Mar 2016, 09:41

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Yuqu12 »

This open letter is a clear sign from a large part of the companies related to Brussels Airport and Brussels Airport itself. It shows that they are all in this crisis together and that they need each other to survive this crisis. It seems like some politicians don't (want to) understand it and this letter is a good reminder for the government that they shouldn't make the same mistake as in 2001.
Mr. Feist said yesterday on Radio 1 that Brussels Airport only achieved the same passenger numbers 12 years after the bankruptcy of Sabena in 2001 and that it should be avoided to go back to the situation of 2002. So yes, this letter is positive to urge the government to take some action before it's too late. Certain MoP understand it, now the ministers who need to decide have to follow.

telspace2005
Posts: 43
Joined: 11 Oct 2008, 12:47

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by telspace2005 »

Belgium is roughly 12 millions habitants.
One of the highest tax rate in the world.
-18 ministers and State secretaries.
- 36 ministers for the regions.
- 7 ministers for the "Communauté française".
- 4 ministers for the "Cantons de l'Est".
- 210 deputies and senadors for the Federal.
- 89 deputies for Brussels region.
- 75 deputies for Wallonia region.
- 124 deputies for the Flemish region.
- 94 deputies for the French "Communauté".
- 25 deputies + 5 members of the Commision for the French Community of Brussels.
- 5 members for the commission "intercommunautaire" of Brussels.
- 4 members for the commision for the Flamisch Community of Brussels.
- 10 governors of provinces
- 60 provincials deputies.
- 574 provincial advisers.
- 8.878 elected for municipalities in Wallonia.
- 1128 elected for municipalities in Brussels.
- 12.450 elected for municipalities in Flanders.
- xxx elected for the E.U.
Roughly 1 billion/year (Euros) in cost
Each mask costs around 0,05 Euros, but very hard to find.
Belgium is bankrupt. 115 % of PIB. 415.000.000.000 Euros of debt.

Good luck to find money for BRU of Bru Airlines. Altough I would prefer as a taxpayer to help what is usefull for the country and to save jobs that to entertain this political circus.
BTW: Nine ministers who take care of the health care system. The highest rate of deaths from covid19.

Now I know, I am banned for ever from this site. So long.

Passenger
Posts: 6860
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Passenger »

Seems you have forgotten the 25 deputies from the "Parlament der Deutschsprachigen Gemeinschaft".

Inquirer
Posts: 2088
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

Add to that 1 governor of Brussels (as well as 1 vice-governor from the different language group) even though Brussels is not a province: nobody can tell you what these 2 are actually doing, but the law stipulates these as offical functions to fill at all times, so it is done.
Not to forget the most overlooked offical state appointment: arrondissementscommissioner, of which there are 12. It's something dating back to the early years of Belgium, when Governors of large and rulal provinces couldn't reach every part of their province easily: nowadays it's pretty useless, but the corresponding function still exists, even though you can reach each place in a province from its capital within 45 minutes and a governor has far less to do than in the 19th century because of our federal state setup.
Oh, to make the list complete: there's even 1 vice-arrondissementscommissioner (for a provicial exclave)
All well paid jobs with a posh office, a car (and in many cases a driver) as well as a secretariat.

PS- feel free to delete as the above is completely off topic, but on a day like today, it might always be interesting to know just what kind of political jobs actually exist in Belgium.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 37252
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by sn26567 »

What has all this to do with Brussels Airlines? And don't think the situation is better in other countries: they also have their states, regions, provinces, sub-regions, departments, arrondissements, ...
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
lumumba
Posts: 1798
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 00:00
Location: brussels Europe

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by lumumba »

Everybody is agree that the way we counted or dead by covid 19 was the most accurate if you compare the excess of mortality it's about the same in percentage in ever EU countries.(not all Germany and some others did better)
Our public debt is 100% now,not 115% and yes it will go higher but this is no exception.
Helping Brussels Airlines is useful for this country....
Hasta la victoria siempre.

Bralo20
Posts: 1448
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 13:48

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Bralo20 »

larsV wrote: 01 May 2020, 06:05

Well said, and now saying BA is important to lufthansa is ridiculous if you see how they treated it. Old planes, no clear future plans, no willingness to let them expand into markets that are served from Frankfurt,...
They are just keeping BA to keep competition away from their backyard.
What has British Airways to do with it? They are part of IAG not part of Lufthansa?

Edit: Unless you mean SN, which is Brussels Airlines (my Euro fell a bit late (as it's already late in the evening) you might meant SN iso BA)

sean1982
Posts: 3272
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by sean1982 »

The government is playing it hard with LH.

They want a business plan for the period 2020-2025 with significant investments into SN and they want a vote on the board, or no money. Makes me a bit more confident our tax money wont be dumped in a bottomless pit

Poiu
Posts: 847
Joined: 14 Nov 2015, 09:38

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Poiu »

sean1982 wrote: 02 May 2020, 11:17 The government is playing it hard with LH.

They want a business plan for the period 2020-2025 with significant investments into SN and they want a vote on the board, or no money. Makes me a bit more confident our tax money wont be dumped in a bottomless pit
For reference: Germany wants 25% of Lufthansa and a guaranteed dividend of 9% for a 5.5 billion € investment.
So the Belgian state should ask for around 1.5% of LH’s shares.
https://kurier.at/wirtschaft/deutsche-r ... /400829816
Without such a guarantee the restructuration plan should be put on the table before receiving any money.
First receiving money and the next day cutting 1500 jobs should be avoided by coupling the invested money to the number of jobs which will survive, eg 100 000€/job.
One thing is for sure though, it won’t end with a massive job loss, those keeping their jobs will have to work harder for a lot less money.

DeltaWiskey
Posts: 592
Joined: 13 Oct 2010, 18:33

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by DeltaWiskey »

Here are the 2 main articles of today:
https://www.tijd.be/ondernemen/luchtvaa ... 24556.html
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/05/02 ... ng-geloof/

It's not in the articles, but Bernard Gustin is rumoured to be one of the main advisers / experts of the federal government (not unlogical) and this is in my opinion reflected in the letter of PM S. Wilmès to LH. The focus of the letter is on growth, additional investments and development of the BRU long haul hub.

On the other hand, I strongly agree with Carsten Spohr that the government should not interfere with running an airline, ie decision on which aircraft to purchase and which routes to fly, these should be sound business decisions based on numbers.

Passenger
Posts: 6860
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Passenger »

sean1982 wrote: 02 May 2020, 11:17 Makes me a bit more confident our tax money wont be dumped in a bottomless pit.
Yep, I share that feeling with you. I had the same feeling with the governments' aid to Air Belgium in the past. And I'm worried about for the financial consequences if TUI Belgium doens't get Belgian state aid.

oldblueeyes
Posts: 91
Joined: 13 Apr 2020, 12:44

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by oldblueeyes »

Poiu wrote: 02 May 2020, 11:57
sean1982 wrote: 02 May 2020, 11:17 The government is playing it hard with LH.

They want a business plan for the period 2020-2025 with significant investments into SN and they want a vote on the board, or no money. Makes me a bit more confident our tax money wont be dumped in a bottomless pit
For reference: Germany wants 25% of Lufthansa and a guaranteed dividend of 9% for a 5.5 billion € investment.
So the Belgian state should ask for around 1.5% of LH’s shares.
https://kurier.at/wirtschaft/deutsche-r ... /400829816
Without such a guarantee the restructuration plan should be put on the table before receiving any money.
First receiving money and the next day cutting 1500 jobs should be avoided by coupling the invested money to the number of jobs which will survive, eg 100 000€/job.
One thing is for sure though, it won’t end with a massive job loss, those keeping their jobs will have to work harder for a lot less money.
Well, Austrian and Brussels still have to come with a serious restructuring plan.
- "old plan" to achieve 8% profit consistency
- this "old" plan sharpened to new reality - stays in the message to the shareholders for next weeks Annual Meeting
- and adjustements towards "new normal" with target 2023 - 20% less capacity

So even there would be a growth plan 2023-25, let's assume at 3-5% per year, we would speak 2025 about a company 25-30% smaller than 2019.

In the same message it is still a hint of "new role for Eurowings Europe" - could also mean a P2P base if negotiations won't succeed.
- P2P Eurowings Europe for short haul for the nice slots
- Africa in "Ocean" or touristic franchise from somewhere else - there is no reasonable reason not to fly this from German, unless there was an interest to protect the Belgian niche and improve it via steering passangers via BRU

Poiu
Posts: 847
Joined: 14 Nov 2015, 09:38

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Poiu »

Passenger wrote: 02 May 2020, 13:19
sean1982 wrote: 02 May 2020, 11:17 Makes me a bit more confident our tax money wont be dumped in a bottomless pit.
Yep, I share that feeling with you.
Young Sean and Passenger sharing a feeling, who would have thought, strange times indeed!

User avatar
lumumba
Posts: 1798
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 00:00
Location: brussels Europe

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by lumumba »

Poiu wrote: 02 May 2020, 14:52
Passenger wrote: 02 May 2020, 13:19
sean1982 wrote: 02 May 2020, 11:17 Makes me a bit more confident our tax money wont be dumped in a bottomless pit.
Yep, I share that feeling with you.
Young Sean and Passenger sharing a feeling, who would have thought, strange times indeed!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Hasta la victoria siempre.

FkBE
Posts: 7
Joined: 07 Nov 2019, 11:14

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by FkBE »

I don't understand the desire of the Belgian Gov't to same Brussels Airlines.
If a company is not financially strong enough to survive, perhaps better of not having it at all?
Are we so proud that we will continue to put money in a bottomless pit?
Didn't happen to the shoe-shop around the corner when it went out of business, don't see why we need to fund an airlines just for the saking of saving jobs short term. There will be new opportunities at Brussels Airport, no? Use the money planned for BA and support the people who would be impacted.

Post Reply