Brussels Airlines OCT '16 figures: +5.5%

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

Moderator: Latest news team

Poiu
Posts: 897
Joined: 14 Nov 2015, 09:38

Brussels Airlines OCT '16 figures: +5.5%

Post by Poiu »

OO-ITR wrote:
Jetter wrote:The load factor is also lower than European legacy carriers like BA, KL, AF and IB. And the lowest among all LH-group carriers.

So improving the LF seems important regardless of the low-cost strategy.
no sweat...they are getting there.
And true the load factor is the lowest in the LH group but on the other hand the pax increase is the highest in the LH group, so ... The emphasis does not always have to be on the negative, don't you think? ;)
October figures show a sharp decline in loadfactor, a clear sign that the growth is unsustainable.
No airline can survive in todays competitive market with a load factor in the low seventies.

OO-ITR
Posts: 688
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 18:29

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by OO-ITR »

Poiu wrote:
OO-ITR wrote:
Jetter wrote:The load factor is also lower than European legacy carriers like BA, KL, AF and IB. And the lowest among all LH-group carriers.

So improving the LF seems important regardless of the low-cost strategy.
no sweat...they are getting there.
And true the load factor is the lowest in the LH group but on the other hand the pax increase is the highest in the LH group, so ... The emphasis does not always have to be on the negative, don't you think? ;)
October figures show a sharp decline in loadfactor, a clear sign that the growth is unsustainable.
No airline can survive in todays competitive market with a load factor in the low seventies.
And of course you focus on the only one negative point. Let me remind you of the other positive points :
pax +5.5% (wonder how the progress for BRU is)
ASK +11%
RPK +10.3%
freight volume +28.1%!!!
freight load factor +3.7%

And yes the pax load factor is down with 2.5% but maybe you should look a bit further before being euphoric about this decline. Even realised that avro's has been replaced by larger A32F and one extra A330...

sean1982
Posts: 3260
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by sean1982 »

Poiu wrote:
OO-ITR wrote:
Jetter wrote:The load factor is also lower than European legacy carriers like BA, KL, AF and IB. And the lowest among all LH-group carriers.

So improving the LF seems important regardless of the low-cost strategy.
no sweat...they are getting there.
And true the load factor is the lowest in the LH group but on the other hand the pax increase is the highest in the LH group, so ... The emphasis does not always have to be on the negative, don't you think? ;)
October figures show a sharp decline in loadfactor, a clear sign that the growth is unsustainable.
No airline can survive in todays competitive market with a load factor in the low seventies.
Something that I have been saying for a looong time now. They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by Passenger »

sean1982 wrote:Same story as every month. Load factor stays equal, so the only reason for the extra pax is the extra space in the aircraft. If they do not manage to get their load factors up this is not a good story. In a low yield strategy, a high loadfactor is of the upmost importance.
Poiu wrote:No airline can survive in todays competitive market with a load factor in the low seventies.
sean1982 wrote:They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Amazing. Eight months after the biggest disaster ever for the airline and its sole airport, all figures show a positive growth, some even double digits. But yet two people read them as negative.

RPK (Revenue Passenger-kms) +12,2%. I rest my case.

sean1982
Posts: 3260
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by sean1982 »

Passenger wrote:
sean1982 wrote:Same story as every month. Load factor stays equal, so the only reason for the extra pax is the extra space in the aircraft. If they do not manage to get their load factors up this is not a good story. In a low yield strategy, a high loadfactor is of the upmost importance.
Poiu wrote:No airline can survive in todays competitive market with a load factor in the low seventies.
sean1982 wrote:They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Amazing. Eight months after the biggest disaster ever for the airline and its sole airport, all figures show a positive growth, some even double digits. But yet two people read them as negative.

RPK (Revenue Passenger-kms) +12,2%. I rest my case.
Actually the RSK is +10,3%, while the ASK is +11,4% which correlates indeed to the growth outgrowing passenger demand, leading to a 2,5% drop in LF, after months of it remaining flat. A declining load factor furthermore is usually an indication of problems looming ahead. My current employer experienced a drop of 0,8% in LF and is therefore taking drastic measures to remain competitive. Problem with SN is that if you already offer 29€ one way tickets, there aint much lower you can go without tons of cash in the bank, and this is with an historic low fuel price! Not a good position when having to negotiate your future.

OO-ITR
Posts: 688
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 18:29

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by OO-ITR »

Passenger wrote:
sean1982 wrote:Same story as every month. Load factor stays equal, so the only reason for the extra pax is the extra space in the aircraft. If they do not manage to get their load factors up this is not a good story. In a low yield strategy, a high loadfactor is of the upmost importance.
Poiu wrote:No airline can survive in todays competitive market with a load factor in the low seventies.
sean1982 wrote:They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Amazing. Eight months after the biggest disaster ever for the airline and its sole airport, all figures show a positive growth, some even double digits. But yet two people read them as negative.

RPK (Revenue Passenger-kms) +12,2%. I rest my case.
Yes indeed...lol. but for some people it will never be enough. Obviously they avoid the fact that larger aircraft are replacing smaller ones. And the fact that they are growing faster than the airport thus growing market share too....

OO-ITR
Posts: 688
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 18:29

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by OO-ITR »

sean1982 wrote:
Something that I have been saying for a looong time now. They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Let me remind you that SN'LF has NEVER been in the 90's but they are still there... ;) even when LH was not around...

Jetter
Posts: 480
Joined: 06 Nov 2015, 21:07

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by Jetter »

OO-ITR wrote:Obviously they avoid the fact that larger aircraft are replacing smaller ones. And the fact that they are growing faster than the airport thus growing market share too....
It isn't avoided, it's irrelevant. With a load factor in the 70's larger aircraft might not be the right choice. Why would you pay the higher costs of a larger plane when all passengers would have fitted in a smaller one?

SN is the only airline with transfer passengers at BRU, and as such the passenger numbers of SN are less impacted by the weak O&D demand of Brussels than all other airlines. No suprise that their market share grew. Remember transfer passengers are counted twice, so their importance is a bit inflated.

sean1982
Posts: 3260
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by sean1982 »

OO-ITR wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
Something that I have been saying for a looong time now. They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Let me remind you that SN'LF has NEVER been in the 90's but they are still there... ;) even when LH was not around...
Which is why they had to take several loans to keep their head above the water, one of them leading to the take over now and a reason why they copied Ryanair's strategy of yield negative/load factor positive strategy. That only works if you get the loadfactors obviously. The ASK and RSK figures are a good indication of that!

nordikcam
Posts: 1203
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:22
Location: Uccle

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by nordikcam »

OO-ITR wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
Something that I have been saying for a looong time now. They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Let me remind you that SN'LF has NEVER been in the 90's but they are still there... ;) even when LH was not around...
I guess this member is speaking about te 90% load factor ! But true ...incredible how they can see the only more or less bad number...and not the others. One can see the glass half full or half empty ! Hummm...I prefer to have my nature ! ;)

Jetter
Posts: 480
Joined: 06 Nov 2015, 21:07

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by Jetter »

nordikcam wrote:One can see the glass half full or half empty !
I can see the glass half full, but I see the planes of SN half empty :lol:

nordikcam
Posts: 1203
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:22
Location: Uccle

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by nordikcam »

Jetter wrote:
nordikcam wrote:One can see the glass half full or half empty !
I can see the glass half full, but I see the planes of SN half empty :lol:
Ok for sure you're right. My experience this week ! BRU YYZ 85% + YYZ BRU 98% + BRU BIO 100 % minus 3 seats in Bizz and class BIO BRU 95%...
I guess it's not so bad ! But you're right for sure !

OO-ITR
Posts: 688
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 18:29

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by OO-ITR »

sean1982 wrote:
OO-ITR wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
Something that I have been saying for a looong time now. They take the risk by adding loads of low yield destinations on bigger airplanes, thats a good strategy IF and only IF your LF is in the nineties. A 2,5% decline is a drama seeing that their rock bottom fares are not drawing enough bums to the seats.
Let me remind you that SN'LF has NEVER been in the 90's but they are still there... ;) even when LH was not around...
Which is why they had to take several loans to keep their head above the water, one of them leading to the take over now and a reason why they copied Ryanair's strategy of yield negative/load factor positive strategy. That only works if you get the loadfactors obviously. The ASK and RSK figures are a good indication of that!
Didn't you work for another airline now? lol

OO-ITR
Posts: 688
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 18:29

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by OO-ITR »

Jetter wrote:
nordikcam wrote:One can see the glass half full or half empty !
I can see the glass half full, but I see the planes of SN half empty :lol:
then you need to go back to school. 70 to 80% is not half!

sean1982
Posts: 3260
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by sean1982 »

OO-ITR wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
OO-ITR wrote:
Let me remind you that SN'LF has NEVER been in the 90's but they are still there... ;) even when LH was not around...
Which is why they had to take several loans to keep their head above the water, one of them leading to the take over now and a reason why they copied Ryanair's strategy of yield negative/load factor positive strategy. That only works if you get the loadfactors obviously. The ASK and RSK figures are a good indication of that!
Didn't you work for another airline now? lol
I dont see why ITR, changing company has anything to do with your company's business strategy.

The figures of this month clearly show that the growth is outgrowing passenger demand. That is just bad news. Point on the line.

OO-ITR
Posts: 688
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 18:29

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by OO-ITR »

sean1982 wrote:
OO-ITR wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
Which is why they had to take several loans to keep their head above the water, one of them leading to the take over now and a reason why they copied Ryanair's strategy of yield negative/load factor positive strategy. That only works if you get the loadfactors obviously. The ASK and RSK figures are a good indication of that!
Didn't you work for another airline now? lol
I dont see why ITR, changing company has anything to do with your company's business strategy.

It also has NOTHING to do with bashing. The figures of this month clearly show that the growth is outgrowing passenger demand. That is just bad news. Point on the line.
Outgrowing pax demand? Do you know the figurers for BRU airport for october then?

Jetter
Posts: 480
Joined: 06 Nov 2015, 21:07

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by Jetter »

nordikcam wrote:Ok for sure you're right. My experience this week ! BRU YYZ 85% + YYZ BRU 98% + BRU BIO 100 % minus 3 seats in Bizz and class BIO BRU 95%...
I guess it's not so bad ! But you're right for sure !
OO-ITR wrote:then you need to go back to school. 70 to 80% is not half!
Nordikcam actually proves my point. If the average loadfactor is 70% and he has been on a lot of flights with 85-95% load factor then that means other planes are half flying half empty otherwise you'd never get to the average of 70%.

DeltaWiskey
Posts: 594
Joined: 13 Oct 2010, 18:33

Re: Brussels Airlines OCT '16 figures: +5.5%

Post by DeltaWiskey »

The October numbers are not great (but also not that bad) and definitely below expectations. Some carriers are slightly increasing capacity, some are pulling back heavily (eg Easyjet, Vueling). In general, business remains very tough at BRU.
Sean1982 wrote:Not a good position when having to negotiate your future.
Replacing SN by EW is not the solution for the current "problem", I am pretty sure LH knows this.

sean1982
Posts: 3260
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines SEPT '16 figures: 8,2% more passengers.

Post by sean1982 »

OO-ITR wrote:
sean1982 wrote:
OO-ITR wrote:
Didn't you work for another airline now? lol
I dont see why ITR, changing company has anything to do with your company's business strategy.

It also has NOTHING to do with bashing. The figures of this month clearly show that the growth is outgrowing passenger demand. That is just bad news. Point on the line.
Outgrowing pax demand? Do you know the figurers for BRU airport for october then?
zucht, it has nothing to do with BRU figures at all. Your available seat km go up more then your revenue per seat km! That means that you get less revenue per flown km and correlates directly with the drop in load factor!

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 40828
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Brussels Airlines OCT '16 figures: +5.5%

Post by sn26567 »

Some posts edited. The authors will know why.

Please play the ball, not the player!
André
ex Sabena #26567

Post Reply