There is a lot of criticism on SN which I understand, but 1 thing I really don't get, why everyone is so obsessed with the leisure network. The 2 simply complement each other with the very big majority of the flights being operated in off-peak times and periods for feeding and business traffic. Sure you can redeploy your fleet to fly 10 times a day on a business route on a Saturday/Sunday and/or in July/August, but you'll simply fly them empty. And if SN would operate absolute 0 leisure routes in the morning peak (it are already just a few on weekdays outside JUL-AUG), sure that gives you a bit of capacity which you can put on other routes. But I whish you good luck to find many of those which aren't already served at least once in that wave and where you can deploy an A320 profitably.
A lot can be said about the SN network, but no matter what you'll always have spare capacity in off peak times that you can use for leisure flights and SN is really not using a lot of peak capacity on leisure flights. Remember taking over the full TCAB network required just 2 extra A320's (and extra peak capacity in summer, like this year with the CSA and GWI wet-leases), still none of that came at the cost of taking away capacity from the rest of business & feeding focussed network. And we're talking close to 1mio pax here!
Just look at LH in FRA, LX at ZRH, OS in VIE etc., they all serve pure leisure routes in Southern Europe and North Africa. Hell, even BA at LHR is serving pure leisure routes!
Why? Because they complement the rest of the network and because they often generate higher income than another feeding flight or business sector on a highly competitive market.
If SN wouldn't have the leisure network at all, it's financial performance would be even worse. So of course interesting what will happen with Thomas Cook in Belgium...
Atlantis wrote: ↑
21 Sep 2019, 13:36
Yes bcs remember the last statement of SN that they are responsible on their own regarding the new fleet and the finance of it. So don't expect that LH will order sth for SN. SN is alone. High time to understand this
You can always read it the way you want, but the point SN was making is that its financial performance is simply not enough to sustain major investments and that for the moment LH is taking the cost of putting 'new' aircraft in Brussels (the 7 A330's and some of the latest A320's are purchased by LH, SN simply wouldn't be able to finance that itself on reasonable terms). You can question the decision of LH to go for (much cheaper) 2nd hand aircraft, but that's also true for OS. LHG's logic is very simple and straightforward: why would I put 100 EUR in SN and not even get 101 EUR for it back, while I can put the same in LX and LH and get 112 EUR in return. LHG will continue to acquire aircraft for SN as it does for all subsidiaries, but it will expect a return from SN that makes it worth for LH to make that investment. OS has the same issue as SN but a bit less worse and EW is a matter of safeguarding LH's market dominance in Germany (swallowing a loss at EW on the short time is still better than letting it collapse and have competition attacking LHG on its biggest and strongest home turf. LH 'investing' (and even that largelly stopped) in EW has to be seen as investing in LH's own security rather than investing in a loss making subsidiary.
But for SN, of course it's worth the question if it isn't very naive to expect a significant profit improvement without investing first. The long haul fleet is a question how it will go in the next months. Of course it doesn't help that so many aircraft come in at the same time, they all come from full cabin retrofit and/or C check, which is synonym to problems very soon after. But if that lasts, there is a structural and major issue. It also doesn't help that pure technical issues are now mixed with 'bad luck', like the cargo leak that held an A332 on the ground for weeks!