It's the main operator at BRU and as such it is in BRU's own interest to have a strong and reliable partner in SN. Not out of compassion but for commercial reasons. SN going belly up would set BRU back many years.737MAX wrote: ↑30 Oct 2019, 18:43Complete nonsense. BRU shouldn’t do anything for SN. It’s up to SN to become healthy/profitable/whatever...
Brussels Airport's potential cooperation with Brussels Airlines
Moderator: Latest news team
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
We have seen that in 2001.Conti764 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2019, 04:58It's the main operator at BRU and as such it is in BRU's own interest to have a strong and reliable partner in SN. Not out of compassion but for commercial reasons. SN going belly up would set BRU back many years.
An old politician then said " with Sabena bankrupt, there will not be any PAX less at BRU";
well reality was that PAX numbers dropped drastically for many years.
It took BRU years and years to recover.
Every airport needs a strong home-player.
Let us see how many more years it will take them to reach the 30million PAX at BRU.
At least 15 years with this present strategy of caring only about shareholders.
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
In a way BRU is still recovering: currently there are 70.000 less yearly flights than in 2001. I believe BRU is the only airport in the world to have lost so many flights in that time period.JOVAN wrote: ↑01 Nov 2019, 08:35We have seen that in 2001.
An old politician then said " with Sabena bankrupt, there will not be any PAX less at BRU";
well reality was that PAX numbers dropped drastically for many years.
It took BRU years and years to recover.
Every airport needs a strong home-player.
Let us see how many more years it will take them to reach the 30million PAX at BRU.
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
The number of flights are not saying anything.
We have much more pax now, close to 26 million a year, with less flights. Why? Bcs operators, airlines are use much bigger airplanes then in the time of Sabena.
Less flights are even better, more pax per bigger plane is much more convenient for the whole environment.
Less flights are also much better for the fact that the airport has a lot of margin to grow. The plafond is not reached yet. And this makes us more attractive then our neighbour airports.
So what is written here in the last couple of posts is completely not relevant and is just writing to write sth as long as it can be negative. But you forget that a few people here can counter this
We have much more pax now, close to 26 million a year, with less flights. Why? Bcs operators, airlines are use much bigger airplanes then in the time of Sabena.
Less flights are even better, more pax per bigger plane is much more convenient for the whole environment.
Less flights are also much better for the fact that the airport has a lot of margin to grow. The plafond is not reached yet. And this makes us more attractive then our neighbour airports.
So what is written here in the last couple of posts is completely not relevant and is just writing to write sth as long as it can be negative. But you forget that a few people here can counter this
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
I just created that new topic and moved a number of posts to this new topic.
André
ex Sabena #26567
ex Sabena #26567
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
I said 'in a way' for a reason. But I do disagree that bigger planes are always better. For connectivity they aren't: smaller planes means more frequencies thus more connection option and more convenient flight schedules for pax.Atlantis wrote: ↑01 Nov 2019, 11:50 The number of flights are not saying anything.
We have much more pax now, close to 26 million a year, with less flights. Why? Bcs operators, airlines are use much bigger airplanes then in the time of Sabena.
Less flights are even better, more pax per bigger plane is much more convenient for the whole environment.
Less flights are also much better for the fact that the airport has a lot of margin to grow. The plafond is not reached yet. And this makes us more attractive then our neighbour airports.
So what is written here in the last couple of posts is completely not relevant and is just writing to write sth as long as it can be negative. But you forget that a few people here can counter this.
Now I wouldn't want to see a lot of Q400 and ATR's arriving, but a lot of Embrear's and A220's would definitely be good for BRU's connectivity.
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
I see you often repeat this statement. But let's not forget that 'caring of shareholders' means 'caring for passengers' as well since it are passengers that bring in profits. If BAC wouldn't give a damn about passengers as you seem to be convinced of, it would negatively impact profits and thus the shareholders.
Everything they do takes time, but that's pretty common in Belgium. And they need to take on things step by step. BRU has positively evolved since becoming private owned. And things are in the planning as well, but can't be all done at once.
Re: Brussels Airport's potential cooperation with Brussels Airlines
Living and doing business in Belgium with 5 governments is making everything more complicated and very slow in action.
To give again the example of Poland, LOT polish airlines received today their 15th B787. They have already a much bigger LH fleet then SN which is a West European country. In 2012 they were even almost bankrupt. But they have the government and a very powerful private company as shareholder.
As second. Close to Radom, in Poland, they are creating one of the biggest airports in Europe. We will see if it will be like this. But the government is pushing to get it forward
In Belgium it takes years but BRU became much better since Macquarie took over and after the Canadian ones. Macquarie BTW has still a small part of shares in BRU.
The mentality in Belgium is that they prefer to concur each other dead instead of working together. Look at this new Trambus. Delayed again bcs of Brussels. West Europe, one of the richest areas in Europe but so stupid and childish mentality. The work and efforts which many people do to attract more traffic is turned back many times bcs of external events
To give again the example of Poland, LOT polish airlines received today their 15th B787. They have already a much bigger LH fleet then SN which is a West European country. In 2012 they were even almost bankrupt. But they have the government and a very powerful private company as shareholder.
As second. Close to Radom, in Poland, they are creating one of the biggest airports in Europe. We will see if it will be like this. But the government is pushing to get it forward
In Belgium it takes years but BRU became much better since Macquarie took over and after the Canadian ones. Macquarie BTW has still a small part of shares in BRU.
The mentality in Belgium is that they prefer to concur each other dead instead of working together. Look at this new Trambus. Delayed again bcs of Brussels. West Europe, one of the richest areas in Europe but so stupid and childish mentality. The work and efforts which many people do to attract more traffic is turned back many times bcs of external events
Re: Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal
Strange logic, Conti!Conti764 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2019, 22:02 let's not forget that 'caring of shareholders' means 'caring for passengers' as well since it are passengers that bring in profits. If BAC wouldn't give a damn about passengers as you seem to be convinced of, it would negatively impact profits and thus the shareholders.
Eg: Forcing passengers to walk along the shops is good for share holders, but quite annoying for the passengers, some even miss their flight because of it.
Increasing fees is another of those examples where the interests of passengers and share holders are completely opposite
Reducing waiting time at security requires more staff, so a cost for the shareholders whilst positive for passengers.
Your statement is correct for businesses where customers have a choice and good service leads to more customers and more profit. With airports passengers have hardly any choice.