The future of Brussels Airlines with Lufthansa

[Established02]

I suggest to stay on topic.

This particular thread is frequently being read by many people.

Let's keep the writing style uplifting and constructive.

Readers don't want to be sidetracked by other issues than the very subject of the thread that they're opening.

If something offends you, just bite your tongue, digest and continue to contribute in a positive way.

[fcw]

According to the Sunday Times LH's financial situation isn't that rosy, they even may have to ditch one of their latest acquisitions, probably BMI!
"Airline industry and City sources say that the sale of BMI is one of a number of options being considered by the German airline, which has been threatened with a downgrade by Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s, the international credit-rating agencies."

This should put the dreamers here back with their feet on the ground.
Standing by for incoming, LX/SN1204!

[tolipanebas]

The BMI case is a particular one, in that is was a forced purchase.
LH (owning just a minority stake in BMI) saw a put option executed by the majority shareholder of BMI, forcing them to buy his shares at a fixed price, so it was not that they wanted to buy BMI in the first place.
As such, there's a zero percent chance LH will sell its stake in SN (or OS) as those were purchases made out of real strategic interest. BD on the other hand, I agree may see a devestment again, although it is said LH would first try to buy the remaining 20% currently owned by SAS so it has total control of the company....
IMHO, LH will likely want to return to the situation it was in before, owning a minority stake in the British company, with the majority owned by somebody else: whether that will be a UK investment fund, or Virgin Atlantic for instance, remains to be seen.

As to the comments regarding SN's long haul network, there are quite some misconceptions:

Any evening flight to the US would be very low yielding, since it means you arrive at the American continent in the evening, perfectly timed to go to.... bed! Since BOS is not a huge hub from where you can catch your connecting westbound or southbound flight, this really makes no sense at all, unless you want to attract low paying VFR traffic, but forget about any top yielding business class pax on the flight, as they'll loose more than a full day of work! The only evening flights to the US that may work, are the second flights to very large hubs, with most pax connecting to other medium to long haul flights. Right now the only evening flights ex BRU worth it might be a second EWR flight on CO or IAD on UA, but definitely not a terminator flight like BOS on SN!

Also, the idea SN will have to spread out its flights to AFI over the entire day is not really makig much sense, since that would mean they'd have to provide additional feeding capcity (for instance noon flights on CDG, TRN, LGW, ...), and loose connectivity to the US.

Besides, the T zone at BRU has a capacity of 6 planes (not 4 like was said) so there is growth built in and the T-zone can be easily expanded to 10 gates....

Also, an evening outbound flight to AFI means you land at night in AFI, something which isn't even allowed by the BCAA on several airports currently served by SN for security reasons! There's a reason why SN makes sure to be on the ground before the sun sets at some places, you know?

Nope, it will be a long way before SN does evening flights to Africa, I can assure you.

[RoMax]

But I have a question. From 25 october, UA is flying that afternoon flight (15:35 arr. in BRU I think) from London. Can this be a beginning for a non-stop route to ORD in the afternoon flying by United? If this gonne happen, than SN can fly more afternoon flights (in Europe) to feed this flights, but ORD is served by a lot of EU destinations of SN already non-stop. And this afternoon flights didn't have connections with the AFI network of SN, so maybe SN can serve some major AFI destinations in the late Afternoon? Or not?

[Boeing747-nurse]

Is it possible that the stake of the Virgin Group in SN Airholding can be switched to Lufthansa for a small part of the Lufthansa stake in BMI to Virgin Atlantic?
Then Lufthansa would already become a majority shareholder in SN Airholding before 2011, when they get full control.

[RoMax]

They already have the option to thake the other 55% of SN in April 2010 and than April 2011, they can choose. But I think the Virgin Group don't have a stake in the SN Airholding. They selled Virgin Express to the SN Airholding so wy should they have a stake in the SN Airholding?

[Boeing747-nurse]

The Virgin Group still has a small stake in SN Airholding; When SN and Virgin Express consolidated ( "fusie" ), Virgin didn't sell to SN Airholding.
I think there's still a representative of the Virgin Group in the new board of directors of SN Airholding
( Stephen Murphy ).

In the actual situation Lufthansa is still a minority shareholder, and does not have the same interests in SN than the other shareholders. They all want SN to make very profitable, but I think not in the same way. Lufthansa sees the long term opportunities, and threrefore will not hesitate to invest. The other shareholders only want to get a very good price for their shares when Lufthansa buys them out in 2 years. Investing in this company does not interest to them.

When Lufthansa could have a majority stake already from now, they are, I think, more free in investing in SN...

Only speculations of course...
Thanks for sharing your opinions.

[tolipanebas]

Maybe SN can serve some major AFI destinations in the late Afternoon? Or not?

There are security issues with a different timing of most of SN's AFI flights.

Now, DKR and NBO might be served around the clock indeed, but as you may know flights there are combined with other AFI destinations which do see limitations to their operating hours, so I do not see how SN will operate evening flights to AFI anytime soon, at least not as long as they fly the triangular flights.

Theoretically, they could indeed operate one or two flights in the evening provided they'd go there non-stop, but that would cause such a network hasstle that they'd give a leg to see that single flight depart BRU during the moring hours too, just like all the others...

Nope, if SN expands on AFI, it will be with morning departures too and if needed, BRU will just have to expand the T-zone at the end of the A-pier (but as already said, there are still 2 gates unused right now...)

[RoMax]

But when airliners like Thai, ANA and Singapore airlines come they want connections to AFI but the B terminal is absolutly full in the morning, so BRU need to expand the A terminal (this is possible for sure) with the perspective to operate non schengen routes. Otherwise this airliners need to arrive in BRU during noon (when a lot US carriers already gonne) but than they lost the connections with AFI. Isn't it possible for SN to opperate some AFI destinations around 12:00-14:00 or arrive this flights than during the night in AFI?

[tolipanebas]

But when airliners like Thai, ANA and Singapore airlines come they want connections to AFI but the B terminal is absolutly full in the morning, so BRU need to expand the A terminal (this is possible for sure) with the perspective to operate non schengen routes. Otherwise this airliners need to arrive in BRU during noon (when a lot US carriers already gonne) but than they lost the connections with AFI. Isn't it possible for SN to opperate some AFI destinations around 12:00-14:00 or arrive this flights than during the night in AFI?

Why should SN adapt its network to the limited airport infrastructure?
Morning flights to AFI are ideal, both for network reasons and for security reasons.

Let the airport invests in better infrastructure for its biggest customer, rather than waste half of its terrain on a silly project for some low cost terminal!

[Conti764]

Also, the idea SN will have to spread out its flights to AFI over the entire day is not really makig much sense, since that would mean they'd have to provide additional feeding capcity (for instance noon flights on CDG, TRN, LGW, ...), and loose connectivity to the US.

Besides, the T zone at BRU has a capacity of 6 planes (not 4 like was said) so there is growth built in and the T-zone can be easily expanded to 10 gates....

The T-zone only provides capacity for 4 widebodies. You cannot fit six widebodies into the area. If they expand it to 10 gates, they can only use 6 gates for widebodies. Of course, they could maximise the use of these gates, but it would be a logistical nightmare and not very cost effective. Sure, they could still expand the T-zone further, but before you know it, you're up to A40 sort of speaking and the A-pier becomes an international terminal. If SN wants to grow 'unlimited' a new terminal is the only option.

Also, an evening outbound flight to AFI means you land at night in AFI, something which isn't even allowed by the BCAA on several airports currently served by SN for security reasons! There's a reason why SN makes sure to be on the ground before the sun sets at some places, you know?

What about afternoon flights? SN can fly the further destinations with a 'morning departure' and the 'shorter' destinations with an afternoon departure. This would have them on and even off the ground again before sunset. And offering more direct flights to Africa, means that they cut one stop on many flights, thus reducing the flight time further.

[Conti764]

Nope, if SN expands on AFI, it will be with morning departures too and if needed, BRU will just have to expand the T-zone at the end of the A-pier (but as already said, there are still 2 gates unused right now...)

Accept for two or four gates (I believe) in the middle of the concourse non of the gates at the A-pier (and definataly at the T-zone) are dedicated widebody gates. The two unused gates you point at, can't be used, not even by a Fokker

[Conti764]

But when airliners like Thai, ANA and Singapore airlines come they want connections to AFI but the B terminal is absolutly full in the morning, so BRU need to expand the A terminal (this is possible for sure) with the perspective to operate non schengen routes. Otherwise this airliners need to arrive in BRU during noon (when a lot US carriers already gonne) but than they lost the connections with AFI. Isn't it possible for SN to opperate some AFI destinations around 12:00-14:00 or arrive this flights than during the night in AFI?

The A-pier can only be expanded in Western direction, and that won't happen as long as they're working on Diabolo. On the other hand, these works should be done in 2011, right on time for the full aquisition of SN by LH and a Western expansion of the A-pier would prove good for SN since most of their own feeder flights are EU-flights, so it would make transferring between Europe and Africa very convenient. Right now the A pier has gate numbering from A30 - A39 (remote gates) and A40 - A72. So I assume they've foreseen the Western expansion (it was planned when the A pier was designed) to have 29 small body gates, so you can easily fit up to 15 widebodies at this expansion. When all Africa flights are gone, it can be used for SN's (or Star Alliance) international operations like DME, TLV,...

[sdbelgium]

Brussels Airlines is changing codeshare numbers on 9W, EY and HU flights from 8xxx to 4xxx basically, starting 25OCT09.

Also, from that date, the BA codeshare stops and SN will place its code on the BD flights to LHR and BD will place its code on the SN flights to LGW.

BD140-156 = SN 5281-5297
SN2121-2130 = BD 5269-5272

[tolipanebas]

Again, why should SN adapt to a airport? Isn't that the world upside down? I mean, it is not unimaginable that in 5 to 7 years time, SN (and its partners) have grown back to what sabena was in 2000, so the airport should start to prepare for that, especially given the fact it has also attracted some other large airlines like 9W! Right now, BRU simply lacks the capacity to host a STAR alliance network airline plus Jet Airways.

5 years may seem like a long time, but they better prepare for it already, for instance by expanding the A pier westbound and turning it into a STAR terminal, rather than wasting time and money on a Low Cost terminal like they do now.

Besides, the current T gates do allow for all 6 gates to be used, regardless what you say.
It's not because the plane can't be parked right at the terminal, that the gate can not be used.
You'll soon enough find out, when SN adds capacity...

[Conti764]

Let the airport invests in better infrastructure for its biggest customer, rather than waste half of its terrain on a silly project for some low cost terminal!

Well, it would have indeed made sense to convert the old terminal into an SN international terminal since the Africa flights of SN already check in at the old departure hall and they could park up to 8 widebodies at an extended pier at the old location of the finger south and a few more at the satelite (although being used as office building right now) but I can also understand the motivation of BRU to invest in a profitable branch of aviation.

[Conti764]

Again, why should SN adapt to a airport? Isn't that the world upside down? I mean, it is not unimaginable that in 5 to 7 years time, SN (and its partners) have grown back to what sabena was in 2000, so the airport should start to prepare for that, especially given the fact it has also attracted some other large airlines like 9W! Right now, BRU simply lacks the capacity to host a STAR alliance network airline plus Jet Airways.

Agreed, but then I believe in a new, dedicated Star Alliance terminal. The western expansion of the A-pier is a good option, but then again, the departure hall would become to crowded in the morning. It is already packed at some hours, let alone adding thousands of extra pax a day. I totaly new terminal with check-in and everything would be the best solution, but does BRU have the money?

5 years may seem like a long time, but they better prepare for it already, for instance by expanding the A pier westbound and turning it into a STAR terminal, rather than wasting time and money on a Low Cost terminal like they do now.

They can't start such works as long as Diabolo is under construction.

Besides, the current T gates do allow for all 6 gates to be used, regardless what you say.
It's not because the plane can't be parked right at the terminal, that the gate can not be used.
You'll soon enough find out, when SN adds capacity...

In that way, yes. But does SN want to remotely board their customers on the crown jewel flights of the company?

[RoMax]

Again, why should SN adapt to a airport? Isn't that the world upside down? I mean, it is not unimaginable that in 5 to 7 years time, SN (and its partners) have grown back to what sabena was in 2000, so the airport should start to prepare for that, especially given the fact it has also attracted some other large airlines like 9W! Right now, BRU simply lacks the capacity to host a STAR alliance network airline plus Jet Airways.

5 years may seem like a long time, but they better prepare for it already, for instance by expanding the A pier westbound and turning it into a STAR terminal, rather than wasting time and money on a Low Cost terminal like they do now.

Besides, the current T gates do allow for all 6 gates to be used, regardless what you say.
It's not because the plane can't be parked right at the terminal, that the gate can not be used.
You'll soon enough find out, when SN adds capacity...

That is just what is was saying, BRU airport need to expand the A pier to the West, this was already their plan but not for long haul operations, but they can easely build a lot gates for widebody's for SN and their *A partners, the B pier can be used bij other airliners like Jet, Hainan, RAM, Royal Jordanian, Etihad... and in the afternoon this gates can be used for the routes of SN and other *A partners like BMI for their routes to Engeland. This need to be the next plan for BRU airport, than they can atract new carriers to a new nice terminal with the space to build bussines lounges.

[RoMax]

Conti764, the aiport of BRU has a capacity of 30 million, we are now at 18.5 million. They only need to renovate some old parts of the airport and the problem of to bussy check in area is gone. They have to expand the A pier, not build a whole new building.

[BrightCedars]

Two points I'd like to make, besides mentioning that we're veering off topic, but nonetheless the conversation is rather interesting.

First point, is that about 15 years ago Sabena used to have 2 DC-10 departures to East Africa around 10p, and a B747 departure to Kinshasa or Jo'burg sometimes sooner, sometimes later, but in the evening. The planes actually land in Africa in the daylight the next day.

Second point, it's that with the current trend to increase electronic check-in of all kinds: check-in online from home, check-in at a booth at the airport (or at a downtown location in some cases, I don't think here in Belgium just yet), dramatically reduces the amount of people queue and the queuing time at the airport itself. Luggage drop off points and self check-in kiosks must be added and that's it. Today, besides the impaired, the elderly, the technology analphabet, families with small infants, and First Class passengers, almost everyone qualifies and is capable of checking-in by themselves. So I don't foresee a need to increase the check-in floor area, just a need to reshuffle it in light of our day and age.