Sabena or not...

[itami]

And you know what the big difference is about 'your' great Sabena and 'mine' incompetent Brussels Airlines ? Brussels Airlines is making profits, Sabena never did.

In a PR by a big *A member of a few days ago I read following sentence : "Brussels Airlines is owned by SN Airholding and is backed by more than 80 years of aviation experience in Belgium."

So please think twice before pissing on your own roots !

[Megaman]

Sabena was a company run by politicians. I think this alone speaks for the fact that it was doing badly on the financials side.

Now imagine Sabena, a private held company (no political influence or inefficiency) with a better management and no debt. The name alone already adds value to the company.

However, history shows that other companies with big names never made it back: TWA, Pan Am (I believe this one tried to come back but that was not quite a hit).

It would probably be great to have Sabena back but I think the only one in my eyes who could have revived this project is Victor Hasson and he's no longer around.

[euroflyer]

I think we can be sure the LH people will look at this issue much 'cooler' than people here in the forum. If somebody can prove to them they would make more money with the new old name than the change to that name would cost them they might be interested. Otherwise just forget about it. Why should they change it if there is no reasonable proof it would help the company to be more profitable? And you would need studies here of well-known consultants I guess, not just tell them well, the name is still well-known in Africa or beyond. Of course it is, but would more people fly with SABENA than with Brussels Airlines? Would they be prepared to pay more because the name has changed? I do not know the answer, but I am sceptic (even if I personally certainly would prefer the old name )

[Bralo20]

SABENA stand for :

Such A Bad Experience Never Again

Actually SABENA stands for: Société Anonyme Belge d'Exploitation de la Navigation Aérienne

But I think you knew that allready

[itami]

would more people fly with SABENA than with Brussels Airlines?

Indeed a necessary consideration Euroflyer !
But I wonder, did the name 'Brussels Airlines' attract more passengers than 'SN Brussels Airlines' ? Surely not. The name difference is too slight. However the name 'Brussels Airlines' is linked to the low cost image and the unsuccessful B-flex/B-Light concept. Rebranding it as 'Sabena' would be an opportunity to upgrade it to the quality image of LH and the future *A members thus attracting more passengers, even at higher fares.

[Megaman]

I agree

[b720]

who says the uniforms have to change? That can be done a few years later..

[airazurxtror]

If Sabena is that much well known in Africa, why did they christen their African adventure "AirDC" and not Sabena ? (By the way, AirDC looks more like DCD )

[jan_olieslagers]

Today's marketing strategies seem to require that companies and organisations change name every couple of years, whether reorganising or not. Don't as me why but sticking to a well-known name is no more important these days, at the contrary.

[Conti764]

SABENA stand for :

Such A Bad Experience Never Again

You really think this is an argument against the usage of the name? When people fly Sabena to Africa (and the traffic is there, an will be bigger via Star Alliance), or in Europe and the service is good and Sabena can maintain this level of service, people will start forgetting the situation Sabena was in the last years of their existence.

It is a whole new company new. It is led by other people and there work a lot of other people for the company. Sabena would no longer be the politically led dinosaur it once was, but a commercial, competing company partially led (or at least monitored) by a company which has grown to one of the biggest and most reliable airlines in the world, through rational behavior, Lufthansa.

The old Sabena wasn't ready for the changed, commercial aviation, imposed by the EU. Their succeeders SNBA and B.Air have been struggling to maintain since their very beginning, so they know how to keep things together. Unlike ten years ago, this time SN is backed by a much bigger company which has proven it's dignity and they will be a member of a much bigger alliance then crappy Qualiflyer.

There is no reason at all to assume rebranding the company to Sabena again is bad for the company. On the contrary, the brand means a lot more then the current brand, not in the least at SN's key market, Africa.

[Conti764]

Indeed Sabena was something special, but if you are realistic, you know that the Sabena we know, will never return.
The Sabena you people love, can never be the Sabena that could return, even not with Lufthansa. Why not?
Because Sabena was everything:
-ground handling
-technics
-catering
-academy
Now all these different parts are all part of someone else:
-ground handling -> Flightcare (FCC Spanish investment group)
-technics -> same name but part of TAT (French)
-catering -> LSG Skychefs (Lufthansa)

Have you followed the tread? Nobody wants Sabena to be the old company again. And it will not become the old company again. This time only the flying company will remain. No catering, no handling, there is still the maintenance department of Brussels Airlines,...

There never can be a Sabena anymore like we know.
Air Key West

Old aircraft -> you're right. Better an old 737 then a new A320 that crashes for some reason.

Don't you think the average customer wouldn't prefer flying in a new (or modern) A320 or B737 in stead of the old workhorses Brussels Airlines now has? These birds are old, very old and have flown for several low cost companies, which can be seen in the interiors.

Uniforms -> Just put a pin on it? Wow and you are blaming SN of being cheap. If SN did this, you probably say: what a lowcost airline wich even can't buy some decent new ones.

Why would they need expensive designer uniforms? Get a young, promising designer to design the uniforms and have them made by a big seller (JBC or something alike). Getting an new, nice looking uniform doesn't have to be expensive.

The Oil prices -> yes they are going down, for now. But if you've read some newspapers these day's, you should know that these prices will rise again. Another remark is that the value of the Dollar to the Euro is increasing. This is bad because we pay our Oil in Dollars. And last but not least, the current economic problems will lead to a decrease of passengers.

Why doesn't Lufthansa suffer from these oil prices? Face it, when you give your customers something they want to pay for, they pay. And if these prices are high enough, your flights become money making. Now mind you this: you have 85 passengers in a kerosene slurping Avro from which more then half pay a price which is considered low cost. Or you can have the same amount of passengers in a modern E-jet (for example) which consumes far less kerosene? What do you consider most profitable in the long run?

OK, Brussels Airlines is in no position to buy new airplanes, but under the wings of LH they can.

b.flex economy + / b.light economy : This study was made in a time that lowcostcarriers were starting to dominate the market. It would lead to the following situation: an airport has 1 big carrier (like AF-BA-LH) and a bunch of lowcostcarriers. The focus wasn't on the price of a seat, but on how many pax you get in one plane.
Today, it is a totally different situation. Lowcostcarriers are going bankrupt. The small airlines are being bought by big carriers. So this will lead to the following situation: at an airport you have 1 big alliance (like Star) and maybe 1 or 2 lowcostcarriers. The focus is now not on how many pax, but on how much a passenger pays.
The strategy from two years ago, has been modified. Wich will probably result in a break-even result at the end of the year.

So they'll have to switch their concept again. What will gain most recognition as full service carrier, Brussels Airlines (b.light/b.flex) or Sabena?

And you know what the big difference is about 'your' great Sabena and 'mine' incompetent Brussels Airlines ? Brussels Airlines is making profits, Sabena never did. That are the simple facts.

Only marginal, and based on one market: Africa. Like somebody said: 4 a/c have to make enough money to maintain the rest of the fleet. That's not efficient. And what brand is best known in that market that has to maintain the entire company? Brussels Airlines or Sabena?

And yeah sure, I see those African people already say: were flying today with Sabena by Lufthansa. Why not Sabena by Swissair, that would be great, just like old times!

Nope. Just Sabena. The Star Alliance logo on the front door and some smaller Lufthansa titles should be encouraging enough to fly this airline and consider them as a new company flying under an established name. If the service is OK, Sabena would outgrow the old troubles.

[Conti764]

However, history shows that other companies with big names never made it back: TWA, Pan Am (I believe this one tried to come back but that was not quite a hit).

It's different, they were almost immediately bought by competitors. TWA by AA, PanAm by Delta. Pan American Airways was tried again in 1996 as a low cost concept (where did we here that story again?) but failed only two years later. Another attempt was made in 1998 and ended in 2004.

[brussels airlines]

Why NOT Sabena (to stay ontopic cauz i'm not going to discuss the entire strategy of SN again and again).
->Because you start with a name wich has a bad reputation in Belgium, Europe.
->What do you think about Alitalia? I think the same when I hear Sabena.
->Not a single ex-Sabeniens will like it. The ex-Sabeniens still working at SN, will say that it will never be the same. It will never be Sabena. The ex-Sabeniens who aren't working at SN will not feel happy that Sabena is used again, however they have nothing to do with it.
-> Sabena is just dead. Story of it has ended long ago.

Why Brussels Airlines:
->Because it simply say's what we do: connecting Brussels wtih Europe and Africa.
->Brussels is much more known then Belgium.
->English name, these day it can be important to have a neutral name (so I mean no Frecnh or Dutch name)

Maybe there is a better/creativer name then Brussels Airlines. But it's definetly NOT Sabena.

[airazurxtror]

Why NOT Sabena (to stay ontopic cauz i'm not going to discuss the entire strategy of SN again and again).
->Because you start with a name wich has a bad reputation in Belgium, Europe.
->What do you think about Alitalia? I think the same when I hear Sabena.
->Not a single ex-Sabeniens will like it. The ex-Sabeniens still working at SN, will say that it will never be the same. It will never be Sabena. The ex-Sabeniens who aren't working at SN will not feel happy that Sabena is used again, however they have nothing to do with it.
-> Sabena is just dead. Story of it has ended long ago.

Why Brussels Airlines:
->Because it simply say's what we do: connecting Brussels wtih Europe and Africa.
->Brussels is much more known then Belgium.
->English name, these day it can be important to have a neutral name (so I mean no Frecnh or Dutch name)

Maybe there is a better/creativer name then Brussels Airlines. But it's definetly NOT Sabena.

I have exactly the same opinion.
"Sabena" is progressively being forgotten - or not even known by the young generation.
Brussels is a city well known in Europ and in the world thanks to the EU.
"Brussels Airlines" is not very original, but it's better than putting still another new name on the can.

[JAFflyer]

I think this discussion is about the "greatness" of Sabena iso the name.
It is a fact that Brussels Airlines vs Sabena is a big disappointment. You used to see that Brussels airport was the homebase of national carrier Sabena. These days, you come to a semi-empty airport with so many different airlines but not 1 catching your eye as a homebase carrier. (eg Iberia in Madrid, BA in LHR, LH in FRA, etc...).
I would love to see a big Belgian airline again, wathever the name... but we are just too small and have lost the battle to our neighbours (Germany, Netherlands, France, UK), mainly due to the incompetence of management and politics in crisis situations...

Just my opinion.

[Air Key West]

Thank you, Conti764, for saying most of the things I wanted to say, too. And to "brussels airlines" : sorry, I don't want to get really agressive, but you are typical of b.air : amateuristic... First you say that some things cannot be done because of high oil prices. I tell you the price has gone down from 147 to 38 dollars. Then, your counterargument is that the value of the dollar to the euro is increasing, making oil prices expensive.
WRONG. The exchange rate of the dollar to the euro is decreasing again, making oil prices even cheaper.
And you say sabena had a bad reputation ? That's what sabena bashers will say, indeed. To be honest, yes the on board service was average (but not bad), but what the young, dynamic unexperienced b.air employees like to forget is that sabena had one of the best safety records in the airline industry thanks to excellent pilots and highly qualified maintenance people. Whether you took off with sabena from Brussels, Oslo, Madrid or Bujumbura, you felt safe. No, sabena was not such a bad experience never again, it was flying safely. And implying that a reference to Brussels is much better, I can tell you Brussels has not got such a wonderful reputation as a city, and for many Brussels = EU = eurocrats deciding things many European citizens do no longer like (see the results of the referendums in France, Netherlands and Ireland). The reputation Brussels has is certainly not better than sabena's reputation. Brussels is indeed very well known abroad, but not necessarily for good reasons.

[sn26567]

Why NOT Sabena (to stay ontopic cauz i'm not going to discuss the entire strategy of SN again and again).
[...]
->Not a single ex-Sabeniens will like it.

Well at least one of them disagrees with you (see my signature), and I'm sure many other as as well.

A large majority of readers of this forum are in favour of thye Sabena name. Why did Brussels Airlines not make a serious market survey before deciding unilaterally to adopt the bland Brussels Airlines name? They would have observed that the name Sabena was still widely known, alive and kicking, with much more appeal than b.air.

I am supposed to remain neutral, so I won't make any further comment.

[brussels airlines]

You know, some people work with long term strategies. To keep it simple: OPEC clearly announced that they will rise the price of oil in future ->because of the economic problems airlines will fly less, OPEC will sell less oil ->prices will rise.

Now to stay ontopic, I want to make something clear first: I don't hate Sabena! I really loved that airline. I'ts really sad for al the Sabeniens who worked very hard that last year to save the airline.

But let me put it this way, if we chose the name Sabena in 2006, would you feel different about Sabena ?

Or I can put it this way aswell. It's maybe hard...but if you have a child who calls Yves. And on a day Yves dies in a car-crash. A year later, you're second child is born, are you going to call it Yves? I don't think so.

Now, to Air Key West: you must know that about 80-90% of the cabin and cockpit crew of Brussels Airlines comes from the Sabena Flight Academy.

[Megaman]

->English name, these day it can be important to have a neutral name (so I mean no Frecnh or Dutch name)

Sabena is for most people just a name (except for some people who I feel pity for). Doesn't make sense to not fly Air France or KLM because of the language of the company name...

Maybe you can explain your point further?

[sab319]

imho, if Lufthansa would change the name of it's Belgian daughter, I believe it's more likely to become Lufthansa Belgium (like they already do now with Lufthansa Italy) and I can see that in the long future every airline of the Lufthansa group will be merged into the single Lufthansa brand, which is a very strong brand in Europe and the world on itself...

so why bother with renaming Brussels Airlines into Sabena when they will probably only have 1 brand name left over in 10 to 20 years from now? The big American airlines only keep 1 of the names when merging (America West + US Airways > US Airways; Delta + Northwest > Delta) so I assume the same will happen in Europe.