Future of Brussels Airlines

Tommypilot · Post by **Tommypilot** » 15 Oct 2007, 22:15

FLY4HOURS.BE wrote:How yes , I see, you work for the State

Keep guessing...

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 16 Oct 2007, 10:40

A few leading airlines are coming back to the first and business class because they can not compete with the LCC. They also understood how important the long haul is.

"The E-175 offers dual-class service with 12 seats in first class and 64 seats in coach class. The first class seats, arranged in a one seat-aisle-two seat configuration, offer 36 inches of pitch, or space between rows. Coach class, arranged in a two seat-aisle-two seat configuration, provides pitch comparable to other aircraft in Northwest’s current mainline fleet."

Why long haul is so important:
"The increased focus on long-haul mirrors U.S. developments when network airlines realized their low-fare rivals had made short-haul operations unprofitable."

First and Business:
"British Airways and Lufthansa in the coming months will be strengthening their premium long-haul offerings, which are increasingly important as European mainline airlines try to secure their profitability."
and
"BA expects to strengthen its premium revenue further starting next month, when it will begin selling seats for those long-haul aircraft being reconfigured to carry more of the higher-margin seats."
and
"Lufthansa is making similar fleet adjustments. Having at one point eliminated first-class service on several routes, it is now reversing course and modifying aircraft"

full article: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 1307p3.xml

Also in the USA some adjustments are made:
"The 76-seat planes are the first in Comair's fleet to include a first-class cabin, and Comair spokeswoman Kate Marx said that will allow Comair to provide service more similar to that of Delta Air Lines."
The Associated Press

To quote R. Bude
“If the airline has to increase coach fares to compensate for the lost first class revenue, I would not be willing to pay more for domestic travel.”

Conclusion: If you want to be a network airline you need an extensive long haul network and 3 class service to be succesful.

I know, the next posts will be about how stupid it is to compare Bru A with BA, Lufthansa, etc,..... I'm not comparing! I'm not an expert in aviation economics, I don't know how to run an airline. I only see some trends.

b-west · Post by **b-west** » 16 Oct 2007, 11:24

1V1 wrote:
Conclusion: If you want to be a network airline you need an extensive long haul network and 3 class service to be succesful.

I know, the next posts will be about how stupid it is to compare Bru A with BA, Lufthansa, etc,..... I'm not comparing! I'm not an expert in aviation economics, I don't know how to run an airline. I only see some trends.

I also see a trend: LCC are now entering the long haul market. This market is not saturated yet, but they will eventually start to nibble away the Y pax from the big carriers. And although Y pax may possibly be looked down upon by those carriers, their large numbers still bring in a lot of revenue, especially on long haul. And I don't think the big carriers will be able to cope with the loss of those pax by adding more F suites...

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 16 Oct 2007, 12:52

b-west wrote:
1V1 wrote:
Conclusion: If you want to be a network airline you need an extensive long haul network and 3 class service to be succesful.

I know, the next posts will be about how stupid it is to compare Bru A with BA, Lufthansa, etc,..... I'm not comparing! I'm not an expert in aviation economics, I don't know how to run an airline. I only see some trends.
I also see a trend: LCC are now entering the long haul market. This market is not saturated yet, but they will eventually start to nibble away the Y pax from the big carriers. And although Y pax may possibly be looked down upon by those carriers, their large numbers still bring in a lot of revenue, especially on long haul. And I don't think the big carriers will be able to cope with the loss of those pax by adding more F suites...

Hi b-west
I don't think that's a trend. It has been tried before but never with succes. Why? For the simple reason that the LCC structure doesn't work for long haul. You can not provide minimum service on a flight of 8 hours. People have to eat, drink,...you have to keep them busy. If you want to fly cheap long haul you take a charter flight. In fact on the long haul the eco is already cheap because of the revenue from first and business class and that's why it will be more difficult for the LCC to make a big difference. Y fares on long haul are very close to LCC fares. Most airlines just try to be brake even in Y class in fact they are acting as LCC's to fill up eco. Why did RYR and Eazy wait so long before even trying to open a long haul line? Because they will have to adapt their proven strategy.
But can you compare Bru A to a LCC?

brussels airlines · Post by **brussels airlines** » 16 Oct 2007, 14:56

Read this (sorry only in Dutch): http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=22632

Time-saving IS for the businessmen the most important when they fly for work. b.flex is offering them that.

FlightMate · Post by **FlightMate** » 16 Oct 2007, 16:58

Does anybody have news about last friday's meeting between pilots' delegation and the management?

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 16 Oct 2007, 18:29

brussels airlines wrote:Read this (sorry only in Dutch): http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=22632

Time-saving IS for the businessmen the most important when they fly for work. b.flex is offering them that.

I think you only look at passengers travelling from A to B. Lots of them are travelling from A to C via B. It's a fact that most leading airlines are investing a lot to please their "high value passengers", are they on the wrong track? Suisse investing in their lounges......wrong idea? http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=22658 It seems to me that Bru A is also trying to fly passengers from A to C via BRU.

I was wondering, because comparing is not appreciated, which airline you compare Bru A with?

regards

jan_olieslagers · Post by **jan_olieslagers** » 16 Oct 2007, 20:23

1V1 wrote: I think you only look at passengers travelling from A to B. Lots of them are travelling from A to C via B. It's a fact that most leading airlines are investing a lot to please their "high value passengers", are they on the wrong track? Suisse investing in their lounges......wrong idea? http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=22658 It seems to me that Bru A is also trying to fly passengers from A to C via BRU.
I was wondering, because comparing is not appreciated, which airline you compare Bru A with?

As others have pointed out, the high-density short-distance markets (Western Europe, certain areas in USA and South-East Asia) are under pressure from low-cost carriers, so traditional carriers are loosing pax there and must look elsewhere for high revenue. So yes it seems natural and wise for them to pamper the long-haul pax.

And you are right again pointing out the importance of transit pax, for myself I regret the feeder services from Dusseldorf were discontinued, but then of course markets change.

As for comparisons: I did not say I do not appreciate them, I asked for fair comparisons. But your question is quite correct: whom is it fair to compare B-Air with? Perhaps they don't know themselves. Being on a tight budget, and with the strict requirement of balance sheets never going into red, they cannot afford to develop a long-term vision or strategy. Their only option is to live by the day, and hope for the best.

As I see B-Air, they are trying to find a position for themselves on two rather different marketplaces: Western Europe short-distance on the one hand, where low-cost grows more and more important so they try to catch their part of the cake, and on the other side long-haul to Africa, where they put their limited investment capacities.

A lot of improvisation, yes, but it seems to me their present situation does not allow any other strategy.

brussels airlines · Post by **brussels airlines** » 16 Oct 2007, 20:35

As Brussels Airlines says 'A NEW airline generation has born'.

We'll see if it is succesfull next year.

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 16 Oct 2007, 20:56

Yes Jan for sure it is a very difficult situation.
Hard competition from the LCC's on the European network and not enough cash to invest in the long haul while the big players start to invest in Africa. The problem is other airlines are massively investing in service and new equipement and for the moment business is booming. With all the planes Boeing and Airbus have sold some airlines will start to flood the market, will they leave room for the smaller players? And as you know airline business is very cyclic it's now you should be making money.
All this to point out the importance of pleasing your high value passengers.

regards

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 16 Oct 2007, 21:19

1V1 wrote:I think you only look at passengers travelling from A to B. Lots of them are travelling from A to C via B.

Agree, but Europe is well served now: the time pax would fly from Brussels to London to get into Glasgow is gone. Also, It's useless for Brussels Airlines to make a real hub in/at BRU without a major long haul fleet, worldwide long haul destinations, long haul cargo setup to bring in more cash, etc. Brussels Airlines long haul ambitions are clear now: Africa. So there will be "hubs" in Kinshasa and Brussels, but not the way JetAirways regards BRU as their hub, or Iberia regards Madrid as their hub for South America.

1V1 wrote:It's a fact that most leading airlines are investing a lot to please their "high value passengers", are they on the wrong track?
regards

Off course not. But who says Brussels Airlines isn't? In Europe, b-flex is a Economy Class setup, and this means there are limits. The rates are much cheaper then Business Class flights from competition. They cannot match competition for every single aspect of Business Class policy. Read the post from luchtzak-member brussels airlines on what Brussels Airlines is doing: to please b-flex pax as much as possible (= within the financial limits), and they are also trying to please b-light pax, by offering them what they've promised.

1V1 wrote:Swiss investing in their lounges......wrong idea?
regards

With the high yield that is possible in Switserland, it would be stupid from them if they wouldn't spoil them.

1V1 wrote:I was wondering, because comparing is not appreciated, which airline you compare Bru A with?

None! That's the problem when people compare here. They don't compare one fact, one route, one aspect of management, one meal choice - but immediately the whole airline as such. Brussels Airlines is what it is: a small company in a small country, based at an airport surrounded by competition (AMS, FRA, MUC, CRL, MAA, EIN, CDG/ORY, LIL, ...). Reliable but limited shareholders, no big ambitions, except for constant growth. Although: when SN Brussels Airlines was setup few months after 11th Sept 2001, there were quite some people who didn't believed in the project. One of the self declared aviation specialists from Belgium gave them 6 months.

I'm not on Brussels Airlines pay roll and I pay for my tickets. But it is a fact that I get a smile from every staff, every crew member and I know I'm flying a 100% safe airline. That is what makes my day.

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 16 Oct 2007, 21:25

brussels airlines wrote:As Brussels Airlines says 'A NEW airline generation has born'.

We'll see if it is succesfull next year.

What do you mean with " A new airline generation has (is) born"?

brussels airlines · Post by **brussels airlines** » 16 Oct 2007, 21:31

It was their slogan at the start up (last year) of the airline. It is the first (or one of the first) who offers two totally different types of products:
-b.light: low-cost, snacks and drinks for sale
-b.flex: pay more (not as much as business class), more flexibility, time-saving at the airport, free (light) meal on board

Now the slogan is: flying your way

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 16 Oct 2007, 22:15

It is the first (or one of the first) who offers two totally different types of products

I'm confused about this one.

Economy/Business are also different products...

Do you mean : in the same class?

I kind of think they copy-pasted the VLM formula right-away, although the VLM still remains better in some aspects.

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 16 Oct 2007, 22:21

LX-LGX wrote:
1V1 wrote:I think you only look at passengers travelling from A to B. Lots of them are travelling from A to C via B.
Agree, but Europe is well served now: the time pax would fly from Brussels to London to get into Glasgow is gone. Also, It's useless for Brussels Airlines to make a real hub in/at BRU without a major long haul fleet, worldwide long haul destinations, long haul cargo setup to bring in more cash, etc. Brussels Airlines long haul ambitions are clear now: Africa. So there will be "hubs" in Kinshasa and Brussels, but not the way JetAirways regards BRU as their hub, or Iberia regards Madrid as their hub for South America.

1V1 wrote:It's a fact that most leading airlines are investing a lot to please their "high value passengers", are they on the wrong track?
regards
Off course not. But who says Brussels Airlines isn't? In Europe, b-flex is a Economy Class setup, and this means there are limits. The rates are much cheaper then Business Class flights from competition. They cannot match competition for every single aspect of Business Class policy. Read the post from luchtzak-member brussels airlines on what Brussels Airlines is doing: to please b-flex pax as much as possible (= within the financial limits), and they are also trying to please b-light pax, by offering them what they've promised.

1V1 wrote:Swiss investing in their lounges......wrong idea?
regards
With the high yield that is possible in Switserland, it would be stupid from them if they wouldn't spoil them.

1V1 wrote:I was wondering, because comparing is not appreciated, which airline you compare Bru A with?
None! That's the problem when people compare here. They don't compare one fact, one route, one aspect of management, one meal choice - but immediately the whole airline as such. Brussels Airlines is what it is: a small company in a small country, based at an airport surrounded by competition (AMS, FRA, MUC, CRL, MAA, EIN, CDG/ORY, LIL, ...). Reliable but limited shareholders, no big ambitions, except for constant growth. Although: when SN Brussels Airlines was setup few months after 11th Sept 2001, there were quite some people who didn't believed in the project. One of the self declared aviation specialists from Belgium gave them 6 months.

I'm not on Brussels Airlines pay roll and I pay for my tickets. But it is a fact that I get a smile from every staff, every crew member and I know I'm flying a 100% safe airline. That is what makes my day.

1. Correct you don't need a hub if you don't have a long haul fleet. Problem is that it's the long haul fleet that make airlines succesfull nowadays. The European network is not profitable isn't it? To fly only to Africa is a pretty dangerous strategy now AF/KLM, Etheopian and EK start to extend their network in Africa.
2. I can not compare b.flex and even if I could I would not give any comments. But just one remark, business passengers on domestic flights usually have a business ticket because they continue their journey as business pax on the long haul flight.
3. High yield pax are not only to be found in Switserland.
4. Ok you can not compare Bru A to any other airline. Fair to me. I think I didn't.

As the only thing I wanted to do here is give some info about what business or first class passengers expect from an airline and I end up in a rather silly discussion between pro and contra fans about whom you can or can't compare Bru A with; I rest my case.

LX this "I'm flying a 100% safe airline" is a damned risky statement in aviation. This makes me think you got your aviation knowledge by sitting behind your pc or that you are ignorant (which I doubt).

regards

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 16 Oct 2007, 23:07

Problem with B.air is:

-unprofitable short-haul
-very profitable but limited long-haul

and

unprofitable short-haul
=difficult to expand long-haul
=difficult to make short-haul profitable

What is needed is a boost on the short-haul or on the long-haul to get out of this endless gamble.

2 options:

-Boost short-haul or long-haul with exterior investment
-Boost short haul thanks to long-haul codeshares (like the AA one) and make short-haul profitable in order to make long-haul profitable.

Africa is a good option to me.
The long-hauls will not be doing better in terms of occupancy (as they are doing very good already), but the supposedly profitable feeders over there will provide the cash to expand the long-haul fleet to more aircraft.

It's risky, but they have been doing well in this domain since the beginning.

AF is very hard competition on the African routes.

But B.air doesn't have the option right now: competing on Asia/US routes against the big ones is suicide.

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 17 Oct 2007, 15:21

1V1 wrote: LX this "I'm flying a 100% safe airline" is a damned risky statement in aviation. This makes me think you got your aviation knowledge by sitting behind your pc or that you are ignorant (which I doubt).

I've said: "I get a smile from every staff, every crew member and I know I'm flying a 100% safe airline. That is what makes my day." Friendlyness and perception of safety are indeed the most important facts (apart from the price, off course) why passengers like - or avoid - an airline. Passengers don't care about "how safe": it's a yes or no. Yes for Brussels Airlines and all Western European airlines, no for Biman, AMC, Onur, Fly Air. Is it a risky statement? No, as I don't believe in danger from black cats, Friday 13th, ... I really like it when pilots say: "ladies and gentlemen, we've just arrived in Brussels, so the safiest part of your trip is now over. Please drive carefully."

1V1 wrote:This makes me think you got your aviation knowledge by sitting behind your pc or that you are ignorant (which I doubt).

Actually, I'm getting my info from where you all should get it: from the airport, from talking to my clients before or after their flight, own experience, cabin crew, sales presentations, talking to a supervisor while waiting at the check-in desk. I really don't need a pc to know the difference between b-flex and b-light.

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 17 Oct 2007, 16:03

LX-LGX wrote:
1V1 wrote: LX this "I'm flying a 100% safe airline" is a damned risky statement in aviation. This makes me think you got your aviation knowledge by sitting behind your pc or that you are ignorant (which I doubt).
I've said: "I get a smile from every staff, every crew member and I know I'm flying a 100% safe airline. That is what makes my day." Friendlyness and perception of safety are indeed the most important facts (apart from the price, off course) why passengers like - or avoid - an airline. Passengers don't care about "how safe": it's a yes or no.

Two different statements,"I'm flying a 100% safe airline" and "perception of safety".

best regards

1V1 · Post by **1V1** » 17 Oct 2007, 16:16

LX-LGX wrote: Actually, I'm getting my info from where you all should get it: from the airport, from talking to my clients before or after their flight, own experience, cabin crew, sales presentations, talking to a supervisor while waiting at the check-in desk.

Is that where you get your information from? All very reliable sources, sorry if I had some doubts. You must be very well informed.

brussels airlines · Post by **brussels airlines** » 17 Oct 2007, 17:19

Problem with SN BRUSSELS airlines was:

-unprofitable EU network (to much competition of big full service carriers)
-profitable but limited long haul

Solution: Merger SNBA/VEX into Brussels Airlines:

-EU network has to be profitable by increasing load factors (introducing b.light)
-Long haul expansion: 4th A330 added, looking for 5th and/or 6th. Opening mini-hub in Congo and later in other countries like Cameroon, Rwanda.