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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

Poiu wrote: 05 May 2020, 14:27 I fully agree with you Belgium needs a solid aviation group in Brussels, but trying to fix something which has been broken for its whole existence despite a never seen expansion of global aviation, won’t work unfortunately.
I think you're throwing away our only fair chance at safeguarding the second most important economic pilar of our country's economy if you outright reject that idea!

In the past, you've been very much in favour of an IAG alternative, but so far I haven't seen any sort of an advantage of such a plan for our country:
- would a full alternative be up in the air faster?
- would it carry more passengers?
- employ more staff?
- on better terms?
I doubt it on each account, so exactly where is the public benefit in it then, if I may ask you?

Remember the bottom line profitabily of a company is of no direct concern to us, for as long as we're no shareholders of it. What matters to us as taxpayers are the answers on the above questions, as these are the parameters that determine the value of a privately held company to a country's economy and ultimately its fiscal budget.

Whether or not Brussels Airlines -or any alternative to that- would have booked huge profits over the past 5 years, they would still be asking for public money today given the worldwide slump in traffic, so to us the outcome would be exactly the same. It might make you more proud if 'our' airlines make as much money as SWISS reportedly does, but what truly matters to a non-shareholding citizen is if it can contribute as much to our country's economy as SWISS reportedly does.

Ge203
Posts: 26
Joined: 14 Feb 2019, 13:28
Location: Brabant wallon/Waals-Brabant

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Ge203 »

I think you won't see a big airlines group starting an airline for the years to come. Priority for every company is to save cash and have incomes without further expenses. I don't see why IAG would want to create an airline in BRU, after Brexit, after Coronavirus. There's just no point for them to do so. And if it were in the past, we would have seen Level in Brussels. Tendency is even opposite with Vueling reducing the offer in the past years. If you have an eye on an airport, you don't let the market go to competitors.

And I don't see the goverment starting a new airline either, should SN go bankrupt. First because of ecological concerns, you know, for the people, aviation is the source of every ecological problem... And also because of the lack of national pride.

Piou, it's not because you repeat again and again that solution to every problem at SN, is to turn it into EW, that it will become reality. LH and SN agreed that it was a wrong idea to do so, and decided to keep SN, which has made them waste 2 precious years...

Anyone has an idea why Reboot never seen the light of the day? I have a feeling that CF never really cared about it, and only had her eyes turned into her place at LH... What has she done for the 2 years she was in command?

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Poiu »

Inquirer wrote: 05 May 2020, 15:31
Poiu wrote: 05 May 2020, 14:27 I fully agree with you Belgium needs a solid aviation group in Brussels, but trying to fix something which has been broken for its whole existence despite a never seen expansion of global aviation, won’t work unfortunately.
I think you're throwing away our only fair chance at safeguarding the second most important economic pilar of our country's economy if you outright reject that idea!

In the past, you've been very much in favour of an IAG alternative, but so far I haven't seen any sort of an advantage of such a plan

You love to misquote me!
Here is what’s I wrote:
Poiu wrote: 03 Apr 2020, 11:54
the participation in LH, which is rumoured in the press, is more or less what I was preaching here: invest in a branch of a solid, if that word still has meaning in today’s aviation world, group.
I used IAG as an example as, I think, when the sector recovers they will be the first ones who will have capacity problems especially because the 3 te runway at LHR has been put back in the fridge, but LH is the more obvious choice for the moment.
Those on here who think SN will continue to operate 45 aircraft and employ 3500 people in the near and midterm future are in for a nasty wake up call though.
Inquirer wrote: 05 May 2020, 15:31
- would a full alternative be up in the air faster?
- would it carry more passengers?
- employ more staff?
- on better terms?
I doubt it on each account, so exactly where is the public benefit in it then, if I may ask you?

- EW can be the air from Brussels tomorrow, Vueling probably next Monday, with the first flights not taking place before a month or two a least more than in time, one would think!
- Unable to answer as we need to see how much capacity SN will cut, but I would think a lot as LH wants profitability. The best guarantee, post Covid, would be part of a group whose main home base is saturated.
- Certainly less, but how many will Sn employ post Covid, 30% less? So probably more less the same as slim-SN
- Same as previous question probably yess, but without a hefty salary cut LH won’t be interested by SN either, don’t forget Reboot alone was about 10% cost. And then again is this about keeping Belgium connected to the world or is it about keeping working conditions and salaries at SN?
The public benefit is obvious, no?
-Safeguarding our second most important economic pillar as much as possible without ruling out any option and choosing the one which in the long term has the highest chance of survival and potential growth.
-Don’t dump money in a bottomless pit which will require continuous feeding during many years to come, but invest public money in a company which has a viable future with the best potential of future growth.
There isn’t unlimited money, this will need to be paid back one day, wouldn’t it be fair to the taxpayer to be careful with their money?

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

Poiu wrote: You love to misquote me!
I didn't intend to quote you, I just tried to paraphrase your key points,

I've read your aswers to my 4 key questions carefully, yet none is showing me any benefit? :shock:
At best you can match (over some time) what Brussels Airlines will still offer us right away....

Why dump them then, was my simple question, knowing you'd risk having to go head up against a core Brussels Airlines still, which Lufthansa could keep on to and make life even more difficult?
The only reply that I see to that in your post is the usual rambling about the 'bottomless pit' which not only is limited in size and in any case isn't our problem since we're no shareholder of them, just as any golden montain of profit won't be ours either from any of their competitors.
Again, where's the benefit to society?

The whole concept seems to boil down to 'anything but them', yet lacks any tangible benefits to me?
It's a nice concept if they wouldn't be around, but for as long as they are, it really isn't such great idea.
The biggest issue that I have with it is that it doesn't offer us anything EXTRA and that it puts the new airline in competition with the old one even! IMHO, it would be foolish to fund what is essentially nothing but internal competition, when we better use tax payers money to team together and fight external competitors as one, as such brings far more return for our nation: a local passenger switching from Brussels Airlines to another Belgian (?) company in Brussels doesn't mean a thing to me, a transfer passenger switching from AMS/CDG/London to BRU however, does.

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Poiu »

Inquirer wrote: 05 May 2020, 18:40

Why dump them then, was my simple question, knowing you'd risk having to go head up against a core Brussels Airlines still, which Lufthansa could keep on to and make life even more difficult?
Well if LH could keep SN going anyhow, the State can spend our money elsewhere, there are enough companies and citizens outside aviation would are in desperate need of money.




Inquirer wrote: 05 May 2020, 18:40
Poiu wrote: You love to misquote me!
I didn't intend to quote you, I just tried to paraphrase your key points,
Well you like to mis paraphrase me then as you just did it again:
Inquirer wrote: 05 May 2020, 18:40 The whole concept seems to boil down to 'anything but them'
and I wrote
Poiu wrote: 05 May 2020, 17:57
-Safeguarding our second most important economic pillar as much as possible without ruling out any option and choosing the one which in the long term has the highest chance of survival and potential growth.
-

JOVAN
Posts: 484
Joined: 08 Jun 2006, 00:00

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by JOVAN »

Passenger wrote: 05 May 2020, 12:44
oldblueeyes wrote: 05 May 2020, 11:54 ... Just that there is a need of responsibility from both sides.

All group companies are doing lay offs - Swiss is preparing for something like 1.500 to 2.000 people, according to Swiss media - and this is coming by an already agreed aid scheme, high profitability in the past etc. It is simple industry reality, due to downsizing of the whole market.

Belgium and Austria where both carriers were regardless of Corona subject of a reshaping program have to realize that downsizing to what made pre Corona sense and adding to that the Corona factor is the maximum that can be achieved. If there would be an unrealistic expectation of employment and guaranteed growth requests than it might be better for Lufthansa to keep at these bases a nucleus of assets on whatever brand (let's say Eurowings P2P offering) and leave the rest behind them.
Exactly - and that is why I don't understand the bluff poker from the Belgian government towards Lufthansa: Belgium demands growth, Belgium refuses job cuts. It's even more incomprehensible because Alexander De Croo (co-author of the letter) is businesswise the most intelligent guy in the federal government: De Croo jr. has studied Economics (VUB & Solvay Business School) and he has a MBA from Illinois University, USA.
Belgium should not play bluff poker indeed twds LH.
However, do not forget that CS is now also in a weaker position, after many years off extreme arrogance?
Towards his pilots, his crew, etc... Probably there have been morestrikes in Germany with LH than with SN in Belgium in the last few years.
On top of this, also German Gvnmt wants to help only if they have a word to say in future LH.

Who do you think will win if it is a fight Merkel vs CS ??
Merkel will it "schaffen"; no doubt.

So i am happy to read that Gustin is advising Belgian Government. And De Croo Jr. is indeed a lot more intelligent than his old crocodile father (who helped a lot to ruin old Sabena).

Also do not forget there will be thousands of new Aircraft on the market with very cheap leasing conditions.
Great opportunities to take.

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by oldblueeyes »

JOVAN wrote: 05 May 2020, 23:20
Passenger wrote: 05 May 2020, 12:44
oldblueeyes wrote: 05 May 2020, 11:54 ... Just that there is a need of responsibility from both sides.

All group companies are doing lay offs - Swiss is preparing for something like 1.500 to 2.000 people, according to Swiss media - and this is coming by an already agreed aid scheme, high profitability in the past etc. It is simple industry reality, due to downsizing of the whole market.

Belgium and Austria where both carriers were regardless of Corona subject of a reshaping program have to realize that downsizing to what made pre Corona sense and adding to that the Corona factor is the maximum that can be achieved. If there would be an unrealistic expectation of employment and guaranteed growth requests than it might be better for Lufthansa to keep at these bases a nucleus of assets on whatever brand (let's say Eurowings P2P offering) and leave the rest behind them.
Exactly - and that is why I don't understand the bluff poker from the Belgian government towards Lufthansa: Belgium demands growth, Belgium refuses job cuts. It's even more incomprehensible because Alexander De Croo (co-author of the letter) is businesswise the most intelligent guy in the federal government: De Croo jr. has studied Economics (VUB & Solvay Business School) and he has a MBA from Illinois University, USA.
Belgium should not play bluff poker indeed twds LH.
However, do not forget that CS is now also in a weaker position, after many years off extreme arrogance?
Towards his pilots, his crew, etc... Probably there have been morestrikes in Germany with LH than with SN in Belgium in the last few years.
On top of this, also German Gvnmt wants to help only if they have a word to say in future LH.

Who do you think will win if it is a fight Merkel vs CS ??
Merkel will it "schaffen"; no doubt.

So i am happy to read that Gustin is advising Belgian Government. And De Croo Jr. is indeed a lot more intelligent than his old crocodile father (who helped a lot to ruin old Sabena).

Also do not forget there will be thousands of new Aircraft on the market with very cheap leasing conditions.
Great opportunities to take.
Where was CS arrogant?
He has to change a bunch of legacy carriers where some of the privileges of the "good old times" are still in place. Look on how Willie Walsh turned around Iberia (making it Iberia express on short haul) and you'll realize that Hansa is not reshaping structures that sharp as the Brits do.

The major issue is a cultural one - we speak about ex national airlines or follow up companies of legacies and there is a lot of emotions, national pride etc attached to that. And on top of it the fact that long haul works mainly via connecting pax thus everybody is eyeing the transfers from the other marktes and as a consequence it is impossible to satisfy everbody's dreams. In Europa only London and with certain limitations Paris with their catchment areas can sustain P2P longhaul - all the rest needs transfer passengers.

The next issue is the product - we do not have problems at all seeing companies doing product segmentation by price/quality/brand positioning, but there is a lot of emotions involved into aviation if it comes to that, unless we speak about a low coster.

If we take all thee things out and try to get a clearer picture, many things could be much easier.

- the Belgian market has a large portion of LCCs - even Virgin Express was one, just to admit that not all SN routes are coming from Sabena
- several legacies in Europe have also a kind of "no frills light" type of product - from LOt, via SAS to Lingus and nobody is offended
- other alliances like IAG have also legacies without alliance membership and a "lighter" product -> Lingsu
- if we look to what capacities SN can fill, than it would into a modern acceptance that the optimal aircraft is a A223 mainly a modern regional airline

BigJets
Posts: 124
Joined: 27 Mar 2005, 00:00

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by BigJets »

Here is perhaps some insight into what's happening. Feel free to comment if you agree or disagree:

It's important to remember that the Belgian government does not care about Brussels Airlines or about aviation in Belgium. All that each politician cares about is themselves and your votes to boost their own power and popularity. When the government gives(lends) money to an airline such as Brussels Airlines, they do not do it to save the company. Politicians do it because THEY do not want to look bad. They do not want to be responsible for a blood bath (except when it’s in their own interest, look at Verhofstadt and co. in the Sabena days). politicians want to be able to say that they “saved” a company, even though they give peanuts. How far do you think SN will go with 290 million? For the government it doesn’t matter if it’s enough, later they can say that they did “everything” that they could to save the company and they can and will blame someone else for the companies' failure.It sounds very negative and it is, it’s very sad. Think about it, imagine for one moment if the government really cared and gave an airline such as SN a real fighting chance. When Sabena was in trouble the government had said that they could not subsidize anymore because the European Commission did not allow it. What an excuse. Strangely enough that never stopped governments from bailing out their own carriers. Air France, Iberia, Aer Lingus, TAP and especially Alitalia which should have been bankrupt years ago, just to name a few.
Belgium should be a little more chauvinistic and should wake up. Alitalia is now being nationalized and Italy will take matters in it’s own hands. That’s a good move to try to save the company, unfortunately, just like here in Belgium, its government knows nothing about aviation. CS of LH is right. Never mix politics with business. At least Italy is trying to do something.
I do not believe that the Star Alliance group is a benefit to Brussels Airlines. Belgium is rather a benefit to LH because it feeds its network. Is that in the true interest of SN? Well, that's another story.
Regardless of what I have said, the Belgian government (somehow) does realize the necessity to have an airline in Belgium but they do not want to take care of it and more important, they do not know how. That’s why they have called for outside help, expertise such as SAS, KLM, AF and Swissair in the past and now LH. All what matters is that Belgium has somewhat of a network within Europe and that the ties with Africa can be maintained. How it’s done doesn’t matter. LH took over SN for peanuts but that didn’t matter, the Belgian government got rid of a problem child. They do not want the same problems that they had in the past like having to take care of Sabena. If the government would have wanted and believed in a strong company in Belgium they would have done so. As an example, look at where KLM is today and how the Dutch take care of their airline. They have understood long ago the importance of having a strong airline for their economy. 3 to 4 billion euros is going to KLM because they believe in it.
Being out of the country right now I can see things from a distance and I realize how ridiculous all these arguments are between Belgians. One fighting the other, language problems, oh boy, we all know it. There is a whole world to compete against, don't you think?
It is now almost 20 years since the bankruptcy of Sabena. Brussels Airlines was created to replace it. Until now the Brussels Airlines fleet and network is still not what Sabena used to be 20 years ago. Many seem to forget how difficult it was to start over. (It is Belgium that practically begged LH (Germany) to take a part in SN, not the other way around). Haven’t we learned anything from what happened in the past after the bankruptcy of Sabena? Is this what we want all over again? Will history repeat itself? What are they going to do, let SN go bankrupt, start a new airline, bring the “S” on the tail back and call it “SukkelAir” like they say in Brussels?
Belgium needs an airline like Brussels Airlines, (but one with much less social contributions because that's one of the major problems in Belgian aviation. Less contributions but more jobs = win/win), one that has a fighting chance against the competition, a strong airline with a good capital. Wouldn’t that be tax payers’ money well spent? Don't get me wrong, I am not for subsidizing airlines endlessly but rather to give them a true chance to survive and thrive on it's own and giving them the right tools to do it. If SN needs to reduce all frequencies because of the coronavirus, ok, let them do it but then use the extra capacity to open new markets and take over where others have left. When business picks up you increase the frequencies, grow instead of shrink. Wouldn't that be something? Time to renew the fleet (plenty of cheap (new) aircraft available on the market in these times). Time to catch up with the years lost. Is this wishful thinking, well probably. Belgium is too modest. This takes money and especially willpower. You need money to make money. Third world countries like the Philippines and Ethiopia have the latest brand new aircraft, what is Belgium doing? Where there’s a will there’s a way.

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

Poiu wrote: 05 May 2020, 18:57 Well you like to mis paraphrase me then as you just did it again:
Inquirer wrote: 05 May 2020, 18:40 The whole concept seems to boil down to 'anything but them'
and I wrote
Poiu wrote: 05 May 2020, 17:57
-Safeguarding our second most important economic pillar as much as possible without ruling out any option and choosing the one which in the long term has the highest chance of survival and potential growth.
-

Fair enough, it's just that I do get the strong -yet according to you wrong- impression you're vehemently against the single one option which is currently on the table, whereas you don't have anything better to offer as a realistic alternative?
How you match that apparent attitude with the paramount condition to safeguard the second most important economic pillar then like we both agree on, is a complete mistery to me.

Bigjets gave a fairly correct discription of the political mindset towards Belgian airlines in our country, so it's clear any commercial initiative will have to be foreign, or it will be purely artificial at best; so far, I haven't read of anybody else but Lufthansa formaly approaching the Belgian government with a serious project once we're out of the Corona-nightmare?

You'd think IAG for instance would at least try to make life a bit harder for their main competitor Lufthansa by starting to troll our government with alternative offers and projections for a re-nationalized Brussels Airlines and who knows if they genuinely mean it, even make good on their historic failure not to grab Brussels Airlines back when they had the best chances (as a codeshare partner of every OneWorld member serving BRU in the mid 2000s), but clearly this is not happening either?
For as long as I have been a member of this forum, I have read here what a pitty it was that IAG didn't snatch them up and how much better that would have been (I could theoretically agree with that even), but clearly now that everyting is up for a replay so to say, and the nice and comforting theories can finally be put in real practice, they don't show up and turn the other way?

To me that is quite sobering and telling that -at present and for the immediate future- the huge chances some see here, are just not there. Reality is at present there are very few options available to us, and the stakes are extremely high if we don't take the single one firmly on the table, so I would be extremely cautious not to take it, in fact.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 37287
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by sn26567 »

If you have some time available, read this sharp analysis of the situation in Belgium with the Federal government, the regional governments, Lufthansa and Brussels Airlines. Politico is one of the main magazines covering politics in Europe and the World.

https://www.politico.eu/article/belgium ... s-covid19/
André
ex Sabena #26567

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

sn26567 wrote: 06 May 2020, 15:47 If you have some time available, read this sharp analysis of the situation in Belgium with the Federal government, the regional governments, Lufthansa and Brussels Airlines. Politico is one of the main magazines covering politics in Europe and the World.

https://www.politico.eu/article/belgium ... s-covid19/
i think it is beyond obvious that the 'problem' to conclude swiftly is the lack of political will, rather than the economic sense, but I do not agree with the take of politico that it is the Northern part of Belgium which is overly reluctant.

Given the airport is situated in Flanders, and Brussels Airlines is a business oriented company, it's providing essential services to predominantly Flemish export oriented companies while employing far more Femish than French speeking people too, something which got noticed by VOKA as they happily signed the letter in DE TIJD calling for a public bailout.

Bart De Wever calls VOKA his employer, so I don't think the problem is to be found in Flanders, just because Brussels Airlines flies around with a Red Devil plane or the Smurphs: people in Flanders cheer of joy when the Red Devils qualify against Brasil, and yet happily vote for a separatist party the other day, and the NVA knows this very well too...

IMHO, the real political problem is situated in the fact our minority government is very weak and overly dominated by liberals who ideologically have a very hard time with bailouts AND have no a clear public mandate for it either, given this government holds just just 20% of the public votes, so the business case needs to be a slam dunk almost: Lufthansa should almost offer an expansion on top, which isn't very realistic given the current crisis of course...

Add to that some in the South still have great asprirations for 'their' CRL and naively see any weakening of BRU as good news to them, even though IMHO the same would happen to CRL as happened to the secondary Barcelonean airports the moment Spainair collapsed: Ryanair moved to the main airport and as good as abandonned their regional platforms for it! I genuinely think that given the fact the Belgian market will significantly shrink, if and when there would be a massive void created in BRU, you'd see an outflux of traffic from CRL towards BRU and a second social and economic drama there would quickly follow up on the first one, espcially if BRU would actively start to stimulate such moves. Remember the high yield demand is to the North of BRU, not to the South of it, so a disappearing of Brussels Airlines could start an exodus at CRL.

theeuropean
Posts: 203
Joined: 22 Dec 2009, 17:35

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by theeuropean »

Good afternoon all,

First of all, I don't think you should play bluff with CS/LH but you shouldn't give them SN for free without some guarantees for the future - that can include more European and longhaul destinations. I also think that a little more service would not hurt SN. You can't pay more money and get Ryanair service, that just is incomprehensible.

More negotiations this week will happen with CS and the BE Government.

By the way here are 2 articles about SN sending the government a letter outlining it's importance to Belgium.

https://www.lecho.be/dossiers/coronavir ... 25093.html

https://www.brusselstimes.com/all-news/ ... o-belgium/

L'echo is in French but I'll give a brief summary. Brussels Times is in english and is a super short article.

There are 5 main points:
1. There is a direct impact on the Belgian economy. It has around 4,000 employees. Each route flown by SN contributes to 4x the amount of employees than if a route is flown by a competitor. The company has allowed for the creation of 50,000 employed persons (10,000 direct and 40,000 indirect).

2. SN is part of Star Alliance, BRU is an important hub, hence why Air Canada, United and ANA fly to BRU because of the seamless connections with SN. They could leave if SN doesn't exist.

3. It's an important vehicule in the Belgian economy with direct routes to close and faraway destinations. The network of Sabena was never fully revitalized so people still have to fly to some destinations with connections. SN is now present not only in Europe but also Africa and the US.

SN was also instrumental in repatriation flights and can be useful in the future in emergency situations.

4. SN is not the "last one out, first one back" like Sabena was. It does even better having stayed throughout the ebola crisis. It has been recognised for its efforts by the UN. It is still the reference airline in Africa.

5. It is an ambassador of Belgium promoting all things Belgian from culture to food and beverages.

Luke777
Posts: 51
Joined: 13 Mar 2017, 21:02

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Luke777 »

All those very long stories...boring to read...bottom line: before corona SN was not able to make profit, even not with an occupancy on nearly all flight of +90%. This is a very important fact for the decisions to come soon... No big stories with hundreds of figures...just ordinary farmers-wisdom guys.

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by oldblueeyes »

Luke777 wrote: 07 May 2020, 07:31 All those very long stories...boring to read...bottom line: before corona SN was not able to make profit, even not with an occupancy on nearly all flight of +90%. This is a very important fact for the decisions to come soon... No big stories with hundreds of figures...just ordinary farmers-wisdom guys.
Let's come with real numbers, not perceptions.
Brussels is reported fpr 2019 under the Eurowings franchise and the whole Eurowings had an occupancy rate of 80%, below group average and significantly lower than the P2P benchmarks.

But the argument you have is fundamentally correct. Brussels is coming from a fleet dominated by AVROs and 319 and was upgauging nearly all routes ( the move was mainly AVROs out and mainly 320s in). This upgauging of 30 seats/ plane for nearly all routes was not absorbed by the market at a decent yield.

The consequence is a positioning dilemma that has to be sorted out strategically.

The 320 is the workhorse of the European mainline fleets and brings the cost per seat close to the P2P peers next doors, but Brussels can hardly fill it. On the other hand the 319 can be filled, but it has a disadvantage at cost per seat and it's follower 319NEO has no market -> a clear signal that competetitivness outside of niches or as side commonality in the 320Fam will be lost within the next decade.

Luke777
Posts: 51
Joined: 13 Mar 2017, 21:02

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Luke777 »

Not only 320s, with the SN 330s on long-haul and surely the africa-lines: even most of their business seats at several thousands of euros (per seat) are sold !! The revenue of these flights is at max , and still not being able to make any profit - for God's sake, what is wrong with the policy of this company ? They tried several years, its obvious now; this company suffers from a incurable disease, poor perspectives...

Sabena320
Posts: 547
Joined: 13 Jun 2004, 00:00
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Sabena320 »

Luke777 wrote: 07 May 2020, 07:31 All those very long stories...boring to read...bottom line: before corona SN was not able to make profit
4 out of the 5 past years were profitable, albeit relatively low except for the year 2015. And the profit loss of the 2016 attacks are higher then the loss recovered from the insurance.

JOVAN
Posts: 484
Joined: 08 Jun 2006, 00:00

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by JOVAN »

Luke777 wrote: 07 May 2020, 10:37 Not only 320s, with the SN 330s on long-haul and surely the africa-lines: even most of their business seats at several thousands of euros (per seat) are sold !! The revenue of these flights is at max , and still not being able to make any profit - for God's sake, what is wrong with the policy of this company ? They tried several years, its obvious now; this company suffers from a incurable disease, poor perspectives...
SN should work on a NETWORK
Regular flights, with the appropriate planes (not too big, not too small, economic..)
Main European cities to be smoothly connected.
BRU has to be part of the strategy to make the airport and airline the best and most convenient transfer point in Europe.
Pier A (+ PIER A West) are are/will be perfect infrastructures for this.

Ryanair will also be in trouble and will cancel many destinations to/from Medium cities.

So a transfer airport will become more important again.

40 to 50 important EU cities can be connected (easy to find out the most important cities that need business-connections. 2 or 3 or 5 flights a day to/from every destination,

Long Haul mainly Africa, some USA destinations , and hopefully the Asian destinations will be back andstay and further develop.
Make Pier B more attractive and efficient (better faster passport control) so that also non-Schengen can enjoy smooth connections.

Leave the holiday destinations to Tui (and Ryanair);

KLM, ... choose Embraers: perfect plane for a NETWORK airline.

All airlines are bleeding and even Warren Buffet runs away from airline-business.

So this crisis is an opportunity to come back stronger in the market than before?.
Being small is maybe an advantage now.

BRU needs SN. Time for SN to put forward their conditions, and a good business plan.

And hopefully the people in the aviation-business will now realize that their jobs are not guaranteed forever.
Strikes have too STOP. Strikes have to be FORBIDDEN in essential industries and infrastructures.

FLYAIR10
Posts: 514
Joined: 08 Sep 2008, 22:05

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by FLYAIR10 »

y Luke777 » 07 May 2020, 10:37
Not only 320s, with the SN 330s on long-haul and surely the africa-lines: even most of their business seats at several thousands of euros (per seat) are sold !! The revenue of these flights is at max , and still not being able to make any profit - for God's sake, what is wrong with the policy of this company ? They tried several years, its obvious now; this company suffers from a incurable disease, poor perspectives...
And what about income from cargo? I once read on this forum that revenue from 'Freight' represented at some destinations (or the whole of Africa ops?) about 25% of the income. Now that LH has taken over Cargo-bookings from SN since 1 sept 2018, what part of this revenue is staying in Belgium with SN? If it is similar than in the pre-nov 2001 Swisscargo-days, then this set-up is likely to be more beneficial for LH-books than for SN.

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Inquirer »

Sabena320 wrote: 07 May 2020, 10:55
Luke777 wrote: 07 May 2020, 07:31 All those very long stories...boring to read...bottom line: before corona SN was not able to make profit
4 out of the 5 past years were profitable, albeit relatively low except for the year 2015. And the profit loss of the 2016 attacks are higher then the loss recovered from the insurance.
Indeed, they suffer more from a negative perception problem than from any past losses in fact.
Their long term profit margin is low for sure, but it's not nearly as dramatic as some try to depict it with much force.

Some cleaning up and a modest refocussing should easily do the trick in fact; don't forget that over the past few years they haven't been able to do this in a normal way, mainly because they must have been tangled up in endless integration and divorce proceedings with the overhead and backoffice of Eurowings: (des)integration costs are easily tens of millions annually for a company their size, which also explains why Lufthansa has been very patient with them: They must know the underlying reasons and their natural potential too.

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

Re: Brussels Airlines in 2020

Post by Poiu »

Inquirer wrote: 07 May 2020, 13:23
Sabena320 wrote: 07 May 2020, 10:55
Luke777 wrote: 07 May 2020, 07:31 All those very long stories...boring to read...bottom line: before corona SN was not able to make profit
4 out of the 5 past years were profitable, albeit relatively low except for the year 2015. And the profit loss of the 2016 attacks are higher then the loss recovered from the insurance.
Indeed, they suffer more from a negative perception problem than from any past losses in fact.
Their long term profit margin is low for sure, but it's not nearly as dramatic as some try to depict it with much force.

Some cleaning up and a modest refocussing should easily do the trick in fact; don't forget that over the past few years they haven't been able to do this in a normal way, mainly because they must have been tangled up in endless integration and divorce proceedings with the overhead and backoffice of Eurowings: (des)integration costs are easily tens of millions annually for a company their size, which also explains why Lufthansa has been very patient with them: They must know the underlying reasons and their natural potential too.
Consolidated loss around 130 million, debt 500 million, you can call it negative perception or irrelevant, as much as you want but it’s black-and-white or better red-and-white.
One of my relatives is a senior underwriter at an important trade insurance company, since 2015 they refuse to insure against insolvency of SN because the risk is deemed too high. They love negative perception though as it allows them to charge a higher premium.

Post Reply