Future of Brussels Airlines

ERICAIRLINES · Post by **ERICAIRLINES** » 06 Oct 2007, 12:22

Bru air is maybe not the ideal partner for an alliance but,Brussels aiport strategic geo/politic situation is ...and if you get Bru air yoy get Bru airport

JOVAN · Post by **JOVAN** » 06 Oct 2007, 15:31

ERICAIRLINES wrote:Bru air is maybe not the ideal partner for an alliance but,Brussels aiport strategic geo/politic situation is ...and if you get Bru air yoy get Bru airport

And WHY is Bru air (maybe) not the ideal partner for an alliance?
Malev is, CSA is, Lot is, Adria is...

Poor management ? Unreliable ? Financial situation? Service level ? Technical level ? Political environment ? Social conditions ?

cyclingcedric · Post by **cyclingcedric** » 06 Oct 2007, 16:10

If Brussels Airlines would be such a great company and make that much money, don't you think that they would have entered an alliance?
Since the merger of SNBA and VEX the service standard has gone down by a lot. The aircrafts are having more technical problems, more pilots are leaving more then ever. Middle Eastern airlines didn't start recruiting this year did they? Most of the staff is burnt out and are fed up with many things. They don't see a future... Pilots are leaving because they can make more money elsewhere. Now as for someone working at a desk, the money at eg. Sony or Brussels Airlines is the same and that's probably why those people don't really care. From what I've been told once is that the cabin crew at Brussels Airlines make more money then someone at for example KLM. I have no idea whether this is true. One thing is for sure that is if you want to make a career, you're better of at a big airline.

Air Key West · Post by **Air Key West** » 06 Oct 2007, 17:45

Hi Jovan : Do "I" think SN doesn't want to be part of an alliance, or no alliance wants an airline like SN to be a member ?
Well, I remember that when b.air was launched, (I'm not quoting any names) the very TOP of the airline said : we don't want to be part of an alliance and we want to remain independent so that we can have code share agreements with airlines from different alliances.
Air France (Skyteam) has code share agreements, for instance, with Finnair (oneworld) and Austrian (Star Alliance). So you see how competent and how well the TOP of b.air knows the airline industry and how well they know how to efficiently run their own airline.
In addition, becoming a member of an alliance takes a long time (it will take Air Europa of Spain more than a year to meet all the conditions to become a member of Skyteam. Joining an alliance usually means you have to make a big investment (in all kinds of things), which is expensive but which usually brings in huge rewards once the process is completed and when you have joined the "club". Is b.air's management aware of this ?
And would an alliance want b.air as a member ? Aer Lingus left oneworld because they wanted to become a LCC and could not meet oneworld's quality standards anymore. b.air is a mix of a traditional carrier and a LCC. I wonder if their current products, especially b.flex, would meet any alliance's quality criteria.

JOVAN · Post by **JOVAN** » 06 Oct 2007, 19:17

ERICAIRLINES wrote:
In summary,main asset of Bru air indirectly is BRU...a perfect airport to create and hub and spoke network(it has been rebuild in that purpose for sabena)...this is the only reason why 9w choosed BRU !!

We should capitalize more on this jewel,as capacities in cdg,lhr,fra,muc,ams etc are getting limited...

Indeed BRU is a jewel.
Pier A is a perfect hub for European(Schengen) flights.

And with some creativity (easy and fast transfers from Pier A to B, and vv.) it could a real good alternative for US and Asian flight.

CDG & LHR are so passenger unfriendly,
FRA & AMS also become a victim of their success.

Imagine if BRU ans SN would work together to make BRU the 'fast and easy' entrance gate of Europe.

Hopefully the 9W story will be successful and materialize.
But how come AA is not introducing more destinations: BOS, MIA, DFW..

HAINAN ? A Brazilian airline...

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 06 Oct 2007, 19:45

Jovan, you are right, but cyclingcedric/tolipanebas or fly4hours or air key west or ... won't even listen to your arguments: every post, every wild story, every breath from ED or GS is used to post something against Brussels Airlines.

Imagine Brussels Airlines would have announced that they're going to join one of the alliances, Then, their comments would be "you see, they're so poor, they cannot stand alone".

Air Key West · Post by **Air Key West** » 06 Oct 2007, 21:25

to LX-LGX : I've just answered a question asked by Jovan in his last but one post. And I totally agree with Jovan's latest post. The only people who have not understood the importance of a b.air hub at BRU is b.air's top. They want to be a LCC with mainly point-to-point flights, whereas their only survival will come from a hub and spoke at BRU. The Belgian market is not big enought to fill b.air's planes. KLM understood decades ago that the Dutch domestic market (which is larger than the Belgian one) is not large enought to fill their planes. So, they set up a hub at AMS already long ago.
Today, either you are a hard discounter LCC like Ryanair or you attract pax via a hub (and BRU is a great airport for that). See AF-KL : huge profits through two hubs : CDG (lousy) and AMS (very good). And see LH : two hubs : FRA (OK) and MUC (very good).
And you're perfectly right, LX-LGX : b.air is so poor, they cannot stand alone. But your partner does not necessarily have to be another airline or an alliance, it can be a hub.

AirDupont · Post by **AirDupont** » 06 Oct 2007, 22:17

I don't think Brussels Airlines is doing bad at all. B Flex is doing better every day I think. It's also great news that they're looking to replace the 146's by bigger aircraft. It shows there's a demand and not just in Flex I mean.

Air Key West · Post by **Air Key West** » 06 Oct 2007, 23:48

I'm afraid all we can do is be patient and wait until b.air publishes their financial results for their first half year of operations. A breakdown by load factors and foremost financial results for European Business class, b.flex, b.light and African operations would be welcome. As long as these figures have not been published, all we can do is speculate according to our own experience with the airline and own/subjective perception of what we have seen. We'll have a clearer view when/if they publish those figures.

BigJets · Post by **BigJets** » 07 Oct 2007, 01:04

Air Key West wrote:I'm afraid all we can do is be patient and wait until b.air publishes their financial results for their first half year of operations...

Oh yes and their financial results will be much better, especially now that the cabin crews no longer get any meals on European flights AND they will also be "saving" lots of paper with the "think before you copy" action. (I suppose there wasn't very much thinking going on before this?)

As you can see folks. Nothing but positive! 8)

JOVAN · Post by **JOVAN** » 07 Oct 2007, 11:34

LX-LGX wrote:Jovan, you are right, but cyclingcedric/tolipanebas or fly4hours or air key west or ... won't even listen to your arguments: every post, every wild story, every breath from ED or GS is used to post something against Brussels Airlines.

Imagine Brussels Airlines would have announced that they're going to join one of the alliances, Then, their comments would be "you see, they're so poor, they cannot stand alone".

I think the people you mention are giving good and useful contributions to this forum.
You, LX-LGX also have good arguments and good analysis about SN and BRU situation.

We all want to have a vital and ambitious ("national") airline, connecting BRU to the economical centers in Europe and the rest of the world.

And we all see a beautiful , centrally located, but heavily underused airport, which - on one hand -is successfully bringing in big new players (JetAirways), one the other hand not able to attract more AA-flights, not able to get CX, SQ,JL,TG,EK... here.

And desperately trying to get second class LCC's as Sterling, SkyEurope, Vueling,... in with very special conditions, but no real added value for the traveller.

The future of BRU and SN is a HUB for Quality Travellers.

Let the LCC'sgo to CRL and drink each others blood there.

( And don't be so sensitive to some critical remarks;
this is a free country).

LJ · Post by LJ » 07 Oct 2007, 18:26

The future of brussels airlines will be that they will be bought by one of the big airlines. I bet it will be BA but LH is also a possibility. Why? One day the shareholders want to see some return on their investment and although national pride will probably be an issue. However time will change this (especially once other airlines are sold to other european airlines). Moreover as one needs more and more capital to run an airline.

BigJets · Post by **BigJets** » 07 Oct 2007, 20:18

LJ wrote:The future of brussels airlines will be that they will be bought by one of the big airlines. I bet it will be BA but LH is also a possibility. Why? One day the shareholders want to see some return on their investment and although national pride will probably be an issue. However time will change this (especially once other airlines are sold to other european airlines). Moreover as one needs more and more capital to run an airline.

Brussels Airlines will be bought by one of the big airlines? Really? Knowing what a rat nest this company is structurally, would you invest millions of your money in Brussels airlines? You said it yourself LJ, one day the shareholders will want to see some return on their investment. This is NOT possible under today's circumstances.

Has it occured to anyone that perhaps no alliance even wants Brussels airlines in their group?

Brussels (although limited) definitely has much potential. Much of this potentiel has yet to be exploited. If Brussels Airlines would like a piece of the cake, they will first have to clean up their act (internally) and make themselves "attractive" towards other carriers or alliances.

As Air Key West has said: It is a long process before an airline is accepted in a group (alliance) They must meet certain requirements. Not only the airline joining but also the other members must be able to benefit from the joining carrier. They must be strategically interesting for each other otherwise it has no sence. To do this the joining carrier must make certain investments. Let's not forget. "To make money you must first HAVE money!"

The Africa network would certainly be an asset towards an alliance and the central location of Brussels is also a positive point (although this may be a disadvantage because neighbouring alliance partners will always promote their own hubs first, leaving Brussels in second place) The code shares that are in place with just about any airline in and out of Brussels doen not help either.

In life, choices have to be made. It's time Brussels Airlines made theirs and finally comes up with a clear point of view as to their future strategy, because, well folks, it just isn't there!

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 07 Oct 2007, 21:39

BA or LH don't need to buy B.air if they wanna take-over BRU.

They can build subsidiaries like LH did in Italy with Airone and bring B.air to a natural end, just like Airone helped Alitalia the way down.
Like I said in another forum, no one will ever want to take-over a 90% leased fleet. The profits will be limited by the lease factor.

The company doesn't even have its own handling division, do you realise how big a loss of efficiency there is there?

And someone said about the Belgian market being too small and that's a sad reality. In Belgium there is an airliner for every 100 000 inhabitants. You can't just live from point to point traffic, you need a hub, people need to go through that hub to get to their final destination, you need to steal your passengers from the surrounding countries by offering slightly cheaper prices, so that people rather travel through you rather than through LHR, FRA, CDG based carriers

ERICAIRLINES · Post by **ERICAIRLINES** » 07 Oct 2007, 22:08

When we see that AZ under pressure op potential (?)owner AF/KL is about to almost close his MXP hub,transfering almost all flights to ..FCO...(except JFK/NRT/EZE)...nonsense !!

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 07 Oct 2007, 22:55

BigJets wrote:In life, choices have to be made. It's time Brussels Airlines made theirs and finally comes up with a clear point of view as to their future strategy, because, well folks, it just isn't there!

It's not because you don't know their strategy, that it isn't there. Brussels Airlines is a privatly owned company, and thus not (legally) obliged to explain its strategy to the public, to luchtzak-members, etc.

The private investors knew/know the business plan from the start up as SN Brussels Airlines. Have you read it? If not, I don't think you should comment on it.

BigJets · Post by **BigJets** » 07 Oct 2007, 23:24

LX-LGX wrote:
BigJets wrote:In life, choices have to be made. It's time Brussels Airlines made theirs and finally comes up with a clear point of view as to their future strategy, because, well folks, it just isn't there!
It's not because you don't know their strategy, that it isn't there. Brussels Airlines is a privatly owned company, and thus not (legally) obliged to explain its strategy to the public, to luchtzak-members, etc.

The private investors knew/know the business plan from the start up as SN Brussels Airlines. Have you read it? If not, I don't think you should comment on it.

LX-LGX, you've got to learn to read between the lines buddy! Take Singapore Airlines for instance. You know their strategy is to be innovative. Always come up with the latest. Every so many years they replace their fleet with new aircraft, not letting them be older than...years. It is a certain strategy. Of course I don't want to compare a porsche with a Lada but we are not going to know their next step since we're not part of the board but at least whe know what to expect from such an airline. At least we know which direction they're headed! The same goes for all "serious" carriers.

Brussels Airlines (SN Brussels Airlines at first) has always been more of a political "face saving" move after the bankruptcy of Sabena, rather than giving the project with a real chance for success. It becomes a never ending struggle. This is a fact they (or anyone in Belgium) has to live with, the results of which we are seeing today! What can we honestly expect from Brussels Airlines when everyone (well, obviously exept yourself) can see they are running around like a headless chicken?

Get real!

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 08 Oct 2007, 01:36

porsche with a Lada

I like that one

Pikey · Post by **Pikey** » 08 Oct 2007, 08:13

Hey guys,

Bru Air is not a member of IVAO. In real, things aren't that easy as they are mentionned here. A lot of potential managers loose a lot of their precious time on the forum, waiting for a headhunter to take them where they belong. At the top of a major company.

Regards,
P.

JOVAN · Post by **JOVAN** » 08 Oct 2007, 10:39

Pikey wrote:Hey guys,

Bru Air is not a member of IVAO. In real, things aren't that easy as they are mentionned here. A lot of potential managers loose a lot of their precious time on the forum, waiting for a headhunter to take them where they belong. At the top of a major company.

Regards,
P.

Pikey,

Most of the people on this forum are aviation enthusiasts.

Most also know "that things aren't that easy".

However, many see that SN and BRU are lacking ambition, and wonder if indeed there is a plan to grow, to take more market-share, create more jobs ...and make more benefit.

The perception many people have of SN and BRU is, indeed, that they run around like "headless chicken", (as somebody mentionned earlier).
No consistant plan. Almost no 'good' news. Weak communication.

Pity really, with such a good location, in one of the richest area's of the world, close to the biggest tourists destinations, ..etc

Your reaction ( " a lot of potential managers...etc ..." ) is typical for people who cannot tolerate other people's opinions.