Brussels Airlines in 2018

[Shengenzone]

Nieuwsblad headlines: Brandname Brussels airlines will disappear.
Unions considering strikes.
http://m.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20180203_03337495/

Note: edit from sn26567:

Not only in Het Nieuwsblad, but in the whole Belgian press:

[FR] http://www.lalibre.be/economie/libre-en ... abb9cddc1a
[DE] https://brf.be/national/1151024/
[NL] http://www.ringtv.be/nieuws/vakbonden-b ... et-staking

[Inquirer]

You’re changing opinions way to many times.

Am I?
I think I've been quite consistant, NOT basing my opinion on the airline itself, but rather on the project, contrary to you btw, who has a well documented aversion to anything Brussels Airlines related.
The more headwind you could have them face, the better, it seems: at least you could admit to that, because it shows in every topic, even completely unrelated ones where you can't refrain from popping up to make your signature snear, needlessly and unprovoced.

What you are giving here would be a perfect definition of what eurowings is. Everything and nothing, trying to appeal to everyone, but not convincing anyone.

And you know what?
I agree with you on that, because as I've said above, I don't look at WHO it is, but at WHAT it is.
I'm not a great believer in the idea you can take an established brand from one market segment and reorient it towards another one, while remaining loyal to your core market at the same time: be it ryanair, brussels airlines or indeed Eurowings too. When the commercial spread is getting too big, it's far better to cut up and come up with 2 brands. And I am on record for saying ryanair should have been cut up long ago when they embarked on their 'forever better' campaign or whatever the funnying about is called at that place, just as I am on record for saying brussels airlines should have been split up and in fact eurowings may be another good candidate for that indeed: both split vertically in a regional airline and a long haul airline, which can then maybe integrate horizontally. Which btw -and I am sure you will have noticed too-, is how IAG positioned its long haul B market product (or is LEVEL even a C market product?) in relation to their regional B market product vueling, isnt it?

BRU will be left without a home carrier once again hence my post of the very wrong decision for BRU to put all their eggs in one basket.

Just for the record: what is their current market share at BRU? 38%....
BRU has been always open to supplementary business in my view, but its not like others have been very loyal to it either, have they? Vueling's base closed hardly a year after it opened, ryanair promissed them a huge expansion but as soon as they found out it wasn't going to be the walk in the park they put their feed back up from the pedal and are going nowhere for years already, Easyjet shrinking too...
Where would other eggs have had to come from, if I may ask, other than intercontinentally and for wich they had only brussels airlines as an asset to sell?

This scenario is what I have feared for a long time and was very vocal about.

Yes, and so far none of it materialized and I am under the stong impression it wont either.
Look, the airline may change name for the 4th time in 15 years and may be completely integrated into a bigger operational set up, allowing for huge backoffice synergies and some reshuffling of organically grown routes between the networks at BRU, DUS, FRA and maybe others, but I strongly doubt they will leave the tarmac at BRU empty for others to come and fill it...it just doesnt match with the ambitions on display at eurowings throughout Europe, does it?

A strong support for TUI,air Belgium and VLM would be a good start. (And before you start, yes TUI has a German head company as well, however having stood close to the airline for about 8 years, all decision power strongly remains with TUB as long as they can justify it and the figures make sense)

I am supportive of every initiative in our Belgian skies which has shown something already, so TUI gets my full support too, even though they are exactly what you slam brussels airlines for, in fact: foreign owned, foreign controlled, foreign branded, with all of the decisions on investment taken in a foreign HQ.

Coming to think of it: maybe that's where your aversion comes from? Brussels Airlines not just as prime target on the Belgian market for your previous employer ryanair, but also the main competitor to that other airline you have 'stood close to for 8 years' like you say? Suddenly it's getting a bit clearer to me...

[travellover]

Yes, and so far none of it materialized and I am under the stong impression it wont either.
Look, the airline may change name for the 4th time in 15 years and may be completely integrated into a bigger operational set up, allowing for huge backoffice synergies and some reshuffling of organically grown routes between the networks at BRU, DUS, FRA and maybe others, but I strongly doubt they will leave the tarmac at BRU empty for others to come and fill it...it just doesnt match with the ambitions on display at eurowings throughout Europe, does it?

Mr Gustin said that the launch of Mumbai was economically vital for the belgian economy. An important economic mission went to India last november.
The african network is a big story with very high economical, human and diplomatical matters at the country level and with the parteners countries. To reward fidelity, SN was chosen as the first international airline to inaugurate the new Dakar Blaise Diass airport last december. Overtaking by far the frame of brussels airlines. In the dark hours that followed the bankruptcy of sabena, relaunching the african network was a concern in Belgium. Playing an ambassador role.
If the rumour becomes true, will there be voices at the political, juridical, economic level that are ready to contest a questionable transfer of the african network in Germany. Not sure it is a reliable business anyway. Why isn't LH Germany an important player yet in western and central Africa ?

[JustPlanes]

I dislike the fact that LH has never been honest and given their real plan with SN... however I dislike even more than whoever agreed to the decision to sell SN to LH didn't stipulate that SN was to remain SN and in BRU... I mean seriously... did the baker and butcher make up this agreement? I know nothing about negotiating all this but that is a stipulation I would have put in the contract specially since LH really got the deal for peanuts...
Obviously LH was going to look at their pocket and their best interests, I mean anyone knows that... except maybe the people who made this deal... so it had to be clear that SN was there to stay! Why did so many employees of SN make such efforts to bring back the Belgian airline... just to see it destroyed by a company who doesn't care about them...

[sean1982]

You’re changing opinions way to many times.

Am I?
I think I've been quite consistant, NOT basing my opinion on the airline itself, but rather on the project, contrary to you btw, who has a well documented aversion to anything Brussels Airlines related.
The more headwind you could have them face, the better, it seems: at least you could admit to that, because it shows in every topic, even completely unrelated ones where you can't refrain from popping up to make your signature snear, needlessly and unprovoced.

What you are giving here would be a perfect definition of what eurowings is. Everything and nothing, trying to appeal to everyone, but not convincing anyone.

And you know what?
I agree with you on that, because as I've said above, I don't look at WHO it is, but at WHAT it is.
I'm not a great believer in the idea you can take an established brand from one market segment and reorient it towards another one, while remaining loyal to your core market at the same time: be it ryanair, brussels airlines or indeed Eurowings too. When the commercial spread is getting too big, it's far better to cut up and come up with 2 brands. And I am on record for saying ryanair should have been cut up long ago when they embarked on their 'forever better' campaign or whatever the funnying about is called at that place, just as I am on record for saying brussels airlines should have been split up and in fact eurowings may be another good candidate for that indeed: both split vertically in a regional airline and a long haul airline, which can then maybe integrate horizontally. Which btw -and I am sure you will have noticed too-, is how IAG positioned its long haul B market product (or is LEVEL even a C market product?) in relation to their regional B market product vueling, isnt it?

BRU will be left without a home carrier once again hence my post of the very wrong decision for BRU to put all their eggs in one basket.

Just for the record: what is their current market share at BRU? 38%....
BRU has been always open to supplementary business in my view, but its not like others have been very loyal to it either, have they? Vueling's base closed hardly a year after it opened, ryanair promissed them a huge expansion but as soon as they found out it wasn't going to be the walk in the park they put their feed back up from the pedal and are going nowhere for years already, Easyjet shrinking too...
Where would other eggs have had to come from, if I may ask, other than intercontinentally and for wich they had only brussels airlines as an asset to sell?

This scenario is what I have feared for a long time and was very vocal about.

Yes, and so far none of it materialized and I am under the stong impression it wont either.
Look, the airline may change name for the 4th time in 15 years and may be completely integrated into a bigger operational set up, allowing for huge backoffice synergies and some reshuffling of organically grown routes between the networks at BRU, DUS, FRA and maybe others, but I strongly doubt they will leave the tarmac at BRU empty for others to come and fill it...it just doesnt match with the ambitions on display at eurowings throughout Europe, does it?

A strong support for TUI,air Belgium and VLM would be a good start. (And before you start, yes TUI has a German head company as well, however having stood close to the airline for about 8 years, all decision power strongly remains with TUB as long as they can justify it and the figures make sense)

I am supportive of every initiative in our Belgian skies which has shown something already, so TUI gets my full support too, even though they are exactly what you slam brussels airlines for, in fact: foreign owned, foreign controlled, foreign branded, with all of the decisions on investment taken in a foreign HQ.

Coming to think of it: maybe that's where your aversion comes from? Brussels Airlines not just as prime target on the Belgian market for your previous employer ryanair, but also the main competitor to that other airline you have 'stood close to for 8 years' like you say? Suddenly it's getting a bit clearer to me...

Pitching SN vs LEVEL and Vueling is wrong as they are both LCC’s which SN with Its hybrid model is not. In fact all legacies are turning into hybrid models as they compete with LCC’s to capture the “I pay a bit more for a better service” customers in economy and high yield customers in business/first, so that’s where SN needs to be pitched against. A strong long haul network with a short haul feeder into it is what they should have gone for. More regional aircraft and the airbus fleet on the trunk routes feeding people into BRU and dispatching them all over the world. If you invest and build a strong long haul network, your short haul nearly becomes self funding. Besides, splitting off SN into a long haul and short haul LCC creates a whole other lot of problems for LH. It will still not sit right into it's portfolio and for the customer they will receive very inconsistent services when coming of a JFK Business flight onto a Venice low cost flight, for example. It just does not work and it's one of the main reasons why BA has brought business class back onto the domestic market when their economy cabins on short haul became buy on board service.

Instead, they embarked on a foolish crusade against Ryanair and successfully fended them off in Brussels, but on the whole of the Belgian market, FR still has a nearly equal market share as SN. They picked up a bunch of low yielding O&D routes which is pointless money that could have been invested elsewhere. Your mantra that you keep repeating is in fact, what various press now reports, the actual reason why the CEO and CFO have to go. SN has little to no synergies with EW and the Germans have no interest in making it work either. Gustin’s resitance is futile and in a short while the brand will disappear and all Belgian jobs in the back office will be gone and they will probably not be reclaimed by “all those new long haul routes” you were once dreaming about.

I don’t have an aversion, as you always claim, just because it is easy to do when somebody has a more critical eye iso or jumping for joy every time Gustin farts. I dont care for Ryanair nor for TUI. I stood very close by it for 8 years when my partner flew for them, and there is much to be said about it both good and bad what i’ve also done on this forum. They might be foreign owned, but definately not foreign controlled like I said

[Inquirer]

Pitching SN vs LEVEL and Vueling is wrong as they are both LCC’s which SN with its hybrid model is not

They are not now, I agree, but it seems to be the plan of Lufthansa to make them just that, remember?

A strong long haul network with a short haul feeder is what rhey should have gone for. More regional aircraft and the airbus fleet on the trunk routes feeding people into BRU and dispatching them all over the world. If you invest and build a strong long haul network, your short haul nearly becomes self funding.

And where to get the money to fund this plan?
It's a nice dream, but just how realistic is it to set up a global network carrier right in between Europe's 4 biggest hubs?

OTOH, I think that 'foolish crusade' as you call it actually saved their company from pending bankruptcy in 2013 and allowed them to grow a lot since then. I dont see what's wrong with it, other than that it somehow killed off certain aspirations you may have had for yourself at ryanair in Brussels?

As to my mantra being that of Gustin, I strongly suggest you to read what I would do from a business perspective and compare it to what he seems to be defending instead.
In a nutshell, because I admit its quite radical: rename the company, cut the back office, move flights which would do a lot better with really global feed to a hub which offers those feeding lines already and grow BRU with mainly point-to-point routes instead.
Not sexy, and very bad news for ruanair and TUI indeed, but other than that, I don't see the problem?
Why should they absolutely keep on flying to say Mumbay while snubbing Punta Cana? If it makes more sense to move Mumbay to FRA so the route can benefit from all the US feeding routes overthere and they use their local resources here instead to capture more of the home market from others, than that's a great business plan in fact, you know? Again: not for others, I agree, but that's not their problem of course.

[sean1982]

I dont see what's wrong with it, other than that it somehow killed off certain aspirations you may have had for yourself at ryanair in Brussels?.

You just can’t argue without getting personal can you? Besides laughable it’s also childish. I’m done

Yes they grew, but in the wrong direction. Secondly, the high number of transfer pax in BRU showed that the 4 hubs don’t matter much.

[Poiu]

I dislike the fact that LH has never been honest and given their real plan with SN... however I dislike even more than whoever agreed to the decision to sell SN to LH didn't stipulate that SN was to remain SN and in BRU... I mean seriously... did the baker and butcher make up this agreement? I know nothing about negotiating all this but that is a stipulation I would have put in the contract specially since LH really got the deal for peanuts...

Do you seriously think they had a choice?
They knew damn well what they signed, but it was sign or go bankrupt within days.
They choose to save the jobs, we should applaud them instead of putting a knife in their back?
LH didn’t get the deal for peanuts, they took a significant financial risk by injecting money in SN. LH is not stupid, if SN would be really profitable they wouldn’t change the strategy.

[Inquirer]

I don't get personal, I get to the point, as evidenced by what I'd do with them.
Too bad you decide not to discuss my idea, because I thought at least someone like you could step beyond the nostalic whining about our links with Africa our the expected union anger because overhead would be slashed.

As to the high number of transfer pax vs their total head count: we don't know the cost/benefit of that to them, do we? Ok, some of their routes are quite exotic and probably draw genuine interest, but on other segments they might very well have to go really low due to the absence of a sufficiently large network.
If that portion of their business would be so lucrative, I doubt it would be under pressure to go, really...
Nor do I think the group would loose any revenues if they reroute those transfers via other hubs, while it would definitely make their operations in BRU leaner and fitter for an extended and much lower cost point-to-point network for which their is a proven market, currently occupied by others.

[sean1982]

I don't get personal, I get to the point, as evidenced by what I'd do with them.

I don't see how my own aspirations at BRU (which were non-existent btw, wanted to work for my current employer since I was about 14 years old) are not personal. It was a childish remark and I'm done discussing with you. I said what I had to say.

[Inquirer]

Well that's entirely your choice.
So far all you've said basically was: "I told you so", and as I've pointed out, you're a fair bit too early with your Schadenfreude to use a German expression, in fact.

[Passenger]

Nieuwsblad headlines: Brandname Brussels airlines will dissapear.
http://m.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20180203_03337495/

Once again: "anonymous sources" - "an insider says" - "rumours are". Probably that trade-unionist, asking the journo "please don't write I told you so"

Unions considering strikes.
http://m.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20180203_03337495/

Sure they do. Problem with the shareholders? F*ck the passengers.

[sean1982]

Well that's entirely your choice.
So far all you've said basically was: "I told you so", and as I've pointed out, you're a fair bit too early with your Schadenfreude to use a German expression, in fact.

wrong again, far from schadenfreude on the contrary. Secondly, just do a search for your old posts and see how you thought that LH was going to bring all that money in to scrap CGN and DUS and make BRU it's new super HUB with Brussels airlines running the show. Told you then it wasn't going to happen still telling you now why your theories won't work.

[pilot_gent]

Sure they do. Problem with the shareholders? F*ck the passengers.

In every business in the entire world, when employees go on strike, the clients are always fucked. So what's your answer, make strikes illegal everywhere?

What would you do if the back-office is moved (> 1000 people), uncertainty about where you work, etc. Knowing that the current situation is a profitable one.

I'm not saying strike is good solution, just interrested in your view how you would react?

edit: typo

[Inquirer]

I thought you were not going to discuss any longer? Good to see you reconsider.
Why such a drama if Brussels Airlines is renamed or its strategic orientation gets changed?
I really fail to see the obsession with a certain name or a certain type of network.
It's not like tomorrow they will stop flying, is it? Quite on the contrary even.
If indeed the point-to-point part of their business gets the upper hand andit becomes their new focus, their past growth may have been nothing but a timid start, as they only have 38% market share in BRU at present and the main competitors in this segment are not exactly eager (ryanair) not exceptionally strong (TUI) for a fight. It could become quite interesting, in fact.

[Inquirer]

Sure they do. Problem with the shareholders? F*ck the passengers.

What would you do if the back-office is moved (> 1000 people), uncertainty about where you work, etc. Knowing that the current situation is a profitable one.

Understandable reaction from the staff affected, but inevitable from a business point of view nevertheless.
Same as at Carrefour, for instance. If you wait till you become loss making (again), it might be too late.
You fix a structural weakness to your house on a nice summer day, not in the middle of an autumn storm.

[DeltaWiskey]

If Lufthansa makes the stupid mistake of moving long haul flight from BRU to Germany, Norwegian will step in the void very quickly, possibly as soon as next year:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... et-445441/

[Passenger]

Sure they do. Problem with the shareholders? F*ck the passengers.

In every business in the entire world, when employees go on strike, the clients are always fucked. So what's your answer, make strikes illegal everywhere?

I didn't said that strikes are illegal, nor that this strike is going to be illegal. I only said it seems to be the only solution Belgian trade unions have: to go on strike and to use passengers as hostage.

Sure they do. Problem with the shareholders? F*ck the passengers.

What would you do if the back-office is moved (> 1000 people), uncertainty about where you work, etc. Knowing that the current situation is a profitable one.

"If".If indeed: only rumours so far. And seriouly: "move the back-office"? Lufthansa cannot move Thousand people from BRU to FRA. This is about local staff, many of them with a home/house in Belgium. With a salary level that doens't allow a second home. So if Lufthansa decides to move the back office, they can just move a few team heads, and dismiss all others. But that legal pay out will cost them the benefit from five years.

[telspace2005]

@ Inquirer:

" It's a nice dream, but just how realistic is it to set up a global network carrier right in between Europe's 4 biggest hubs?

Question: Why the Nederlands has succeded making AMS one of Europe's 4 biggest hub ? (as you said). Belgium and Nederlands are very closed, almost the same population, same weather, same PIB, etc..
Why AMS is a major hub and not BRU ? How come ?

(...and on the same panel, why as soon as you have crossed the borders of Belgium, you find clean and well maintained streets, highways, clean trains, ...on time ! well preserved landscapes and so on)

[Passenger]

If SN workers decide to strike after the decisions which will be announced by LH tomorrow, Monday, In Frankfurt, I hope they will give an official notice of strike to protect themselves against legal action from LH. No emotional wildcat strikes, please.

When employees go on a wildcat strike, their are acting illegally for just a very short period of time: untill the unions advise management/owners that they recognize the strike. Usually, that's done with a few hours. Only when the trade unions don't support a wildcat strike, the strikers are at risk.

On top, a wildcat strike is the worst strike that can happen for passengers. It's seen as an "extreme circumstance" - thus avoidable - thus limiting the responsability from the airline towards passengers and cargo-clients. Regarding to EU-261/2004, that means: no right to compensation, no right for indemnity of direct and indirect costs.

But then again - is that the only worry here: "legal protection against LH"? Show respect for the passengers please. Don't screw their business meetings. Don't screw their holidays (cheap or expensive).