sounilr21 wrote: ↑
04 Oct 2019, 11:08
Atlantis wrote: ↑
04 Oct 2019, 09:27
Conti764 wrote: ↑
04 Oct 2019, 00:34
DL relies heavily on its different joint-ventures and with AF/KL being on of them, there is no place for BRU in the scheme, except for select flights they already offer today.
I know, the have very strong bound with AF/KLM, that's why they are also doing very well. They respect each other and grow together. This is strong contradiction between SN and LH...
But DL has also very strong bounds with Virgin Atlantic. DL is really not a stupid company, they have smart management and they are spread over the world regarding acquisitions in airlines. Risk is let's say minimal if you can say like this in aviation.
One extra destination for them at BRU would be great to work on and to be successful. Boston is that destination.
Delta (and Skyteam) could play an important card in its game to develop in Brussels: Boston would be the perfect third destination after Atlanta and JFK or why not Detroit ?
But maybe other destinations (in China for example). Schiphol seems to be very close to saturation. Why not consider BRU as "alternative" between CDG and AMS. Delta makes very smart choices in its strategy.
About Star Alliance, only Air Canada seems to want to strengthen in Brussels.
No news of a line opening with United ? About SFO ?
Lufthansa seems to want to "minimize" the role of Brussels Airlines in Star Alliance by keeping a fog around his plans. In these circumstances, it is difficult for a Star Alliance partner (such as Singapore or even Asiana) to see a real interest to coming in Brussels. Singapore is in a joint venture with Lufthansa Group in Frankfurt, Munich and Zurich, why not extend this joint venture with Brussels Airlines ?
Still no news of the Oman Air project about Muscat?
We had Detroit a few years ago with Northwest Airlines. At that time we had 5 big American companies at BRU. Before the mergers.
Detroit became after an economic dead city. The economy, car industry, collapsed. Detroit is for the moment less attractive than Boston.
The existing Star companies are growing a bit in BRU. As we know, AC will open a second route from Canada while UA will add the second B787-10 to BRU.
We could expect also in future bigger equipment of Ethiopian.
There is still one big one in the pipeline but as always they hesitate and hesitate bcs they have also strong bound with LH. It would be really nice, and this is what we are hoping for, that they finally would announce it before this month end.
But BRU needs more bcs it is standing still for the moment. Cargo is doing bad bcs of trade war, companies who left and still no link with the new Chinese carrier.
But there is no positive growth for the moment in pax. There is still more than enough space during the morning and especially during afternoon and evening.
LH left SN behind as a sick child. They have to heal themselves, recover and standing alone. Somehow I cannot imagine that LH would like to SN going bankrupt, but it is also not helping, not supporting. This reboot plan will be really hard. And as we know Belgians, they always backwards when it goes about saving costs, they don't invest more to harvest later.
On this way LH is keeping SN very small and let BRU also not grow.
Two possibilities: you have to support your home carrier, but you are also limited in this bcs you don't run this company. So than you have to negotiate with the two other alliances, OneWorld and Skyteam, to use BRU more as an option. AMS will never use BRU as a satellite airport bcs they want to keep the progress and better economy in their own country. Look at the NL government, they have billions as savings, they have money too much to invest, while the Belgian government has huge debts....
Links with China and South America is very needed and much more flights to Africa. Africa is really the continent to be
Second option but a bit more tricky and again Belgian political issues is to let Air Belgium fly from BRU or at least certain flights. Let them open some needed routes