Brussels Airlines joining Star Alliance in December 2009

[Air Key West]

For once, I will disagree with you, tolipanebas. You say that from the onset, b.air's strategy was to join a mega-carrier network if I understood you well. Actually, I don't think so. I clearly remember the headlines in the Belgian press on the occasion of the Snba/Vex merger. Davigon said " We are low cost and we intend to remain independent". Both pillars of this strategy have now crumbled as we know.
I agree with you, however, that as the larger partner (in the merger process), it can be assumed that by absorbing Vex, snba wanted to get rid of its (at that time) main competitor. The major mistake it made was to adopt the smaller partner's operational strategy (low cost) although Vex practically never made a profit. Snba should indeed have kept on fighting and operating alone (= without Vex's ballast). It is highly likely that Vex would eventually (= finally) have disappeared from the European skies (like SkyEurope, for instance) and Snba would have been just as attractive, if not more attractive for a potential buyer, and shareholders would probably have done a better deal, as you rightly point out.
However, it still seems difficult to get rid of the Vex ballast. Concretely, Vex's 737s are slowly leaving the fleet, true, but is management's mentality changing ? Or only when their arms are being twisted (by Star Alliance and LH) ?

[tolipanebas]

For once, I will disagree with you, tolipanebas. You say that from the onset, b.air's strategy was to join a mega-carrier network if I understood you well. Actually, I don't think so. I clearly remember the headlines in the Belgian press on the occasion of the Snba/Vex merger. Davigon said " We are low cost and we intend to remain independent". Both pillars of this strategy have now crumbled as we know.

Oh, I know Davignon said that, but it just didn't make any sense really.

SN could never have soldiered on for decades as a stand alone airline (how were they ever going to finance the fleet renewal for instance?), and it had already decided to look to join an alliance after all.

As we all knew from the onset, the 2 issues would become heavily linked and NO alliance would ever want to take in a low cost carrier, so whatever Davignon was thinking back then, everybody with a bit of understanding of how the aviation industry works knew it was wrong the moment he said it.

I agree with you, however, that as the larger partner (in the merger process), it can be assumed that by absorbing Vex, snba wanted to get rid of its (at that time) main competitor. The major mistake it made was to adopt the smaller partner's operational strategy (low cost) although Vex practically never made a profit. Snba should indeed have kept on fighting and operating alone (= without Vex's ballast). It is highly likely that Vex would eventually (= finally) have disappeared from the European skies (like SkyEurope, for instance) and Snba would have been just as attractive, if not more attractive for a potential buyer, and shareholders would probably have done a better deal, as you rightly point out.

I think that is a given now.

[NCB]

I must agree that taken from a distance now, it can be said that VEX was a waste of time and money.
Though SN wanted to be taken over by a big airline as shareholders attempted to get rid of their stock, more longhaul to Africa was a higher priority than VEX, instead they went to rescue an airline that was going down anyway to reduce competition. That was one of the bad calls from the board.

1,374 euros for a return business class ticket from BRU to MAD : who wants/can pay that amount of money for two two-hour-flights ?
On the contrary, LX which is a very successfull airline, has often very attractive business fare. The only downturn is you cannot fly nonstop, but ZRH is OK for transit. So, whenever I can afford to travel in business class, I travel with LX thorugh ZRH ; travel is a little longer, but you pay less and you get a better service than on b.air.

LX has average fleet-wide load factors of 80%. Being an important financial center, ZRH naturally attracts many business class passengers, so they can afford to put a reasonable price tag on their C fares as they get many C bookings.
SN doesn't have this so it is forced to charge the few who book business class as much as they can.
Lower fares will not attract more business passengers.

I find 1300 EUR return to MAD reasonable if the product goes along.

The increasing threat of the low-cost carriers must be fought head-on and not be escaped from.
What is SN doing now to fight Ryanair at CRL? Answer to my question: all the wrong things.

To become profitable on shorthaul, on top of fleet renewal which will help alot obviously, SN needs to focus on making money on the products and services Ryanair and Easyjet can not offer. Business class that is.

To achieve a drastic change, the product must be very attractive.
What we have now:
expensive Y
expensive Y+ sold as "Flex"
expensive Y++ sold as C with the only difference over Y+ being "premium catering", more useless miles and useless additional luggage allowance.

B.light and B.flex were so-so, now we have disaster on "C".

In my opinion, the C product must be made clearly different from the B.flex offering to attract a new customer basis. Lufthansa, Air France and British Airways have a huge C customer basis, so it was the customer who needed to adapt to the product, until lately when they were forced to reduce their C capacity and increase Y capacity because C customers have all downgraded.
For SN that is not the case, that's why SN must do it differently.

It costs nothing to remove 4 rows of seats, install wires for the seat and install a decent business class seat.
It doesn't have to be a full lie-flat, it doesn't need to have a massage function, just something that makes it comfortable to rest.
The Virgin America First product pictured above is 55 inch pitch 21 inch width. That means that 2 rows of 5 seats on a RJ85/100 can become 1 row of 4 seats, while maintaining the aisle and enough space for a bulkhead between the C and Y cabin. The A319's can be converted easily too. If I were SN's board, I would focus on this new C product, install 2 rows on RJ85, 3 rows on RJ100 and A319.

Ryanair can not operate at night at most of their airports and Ryanair does not operate midhaul. Those are markets SN needs to target, hence SN should by combining both, and to increase aircraft utilisation, look for more red eye midhaul routes like CAI and CMN. 3 birds with one stone.

SN can also focus on adding cargo revenue on shorthaul, things that Ryanair and Easyjet will avoid.
Southwest Airlines generates 5% of revenue from cargo.

But to be really strong, SN must also fight head to head with Ryanair and a possible expansion of Easyjet at BRU, on the products they offer.
I would downgrade B.Flex into a simple Y fare to more LCC-oriented standards, decrease pitch on A319/RJ's enough to add one more row of Y seats. The B.Flex passengers who want more than Y but find it ridiculous to pay more for SN's actual C product when B.Flex is 95% the same, will be happy to pay for a real C seat.
I would offer the possibility to buy very decent on-board catering to all Y passengers (for instance 3 choices of menu for 30 euro with 2 x 20cl drinks) online during the booking process, so that it can be loaded on board together with the C catering and those passengers can be seated to the front of the cabin during the check-in process for easy servicing.
I would sell the flexibility as an option.

The "99 EUR return" posters are not impressing anyone anymore. In 90% of the cases, customers are not able to find a 99 EUR return once on SN's website (and become angry!!), and in 90% of cases Ryanair will be selling a ticket for less than 99 EUR return. What do customers do? They no longer take a look on SN's website anymore.
Everyday, 5 000 passengers are choosing to fly with Ryanair over SN between destinations served by both airlines.

SN has all interest in overturning this situation because:
For every Y passenger that will choose SN over Ryanair based on price, FR will lose one customer.
For every customer FR loses, another customer who wants to fly with FR will have to pay more. Though it may not be lucrative for SN immediately, it will be in the long term.
SN needs to start selling returns in Europe for 65 EUR, including taxes, "with free luggage"!

Marketing? One of SN's CEO's should get on TV and declare war to Ryanair with 1 million seats at 65 EUR return over the entire winter.
"with free luggage",
"legroom for human beings, not shrimps" and
"we don't treat you like cattle"
"our passengers will never pay to go to the toilet"
and
"we have Europe's business class of choice"

Timing? Preferrably end of the summer season because there is no point in starting such a campaign in the summer.
What's the point? Cheaper than to pay advertisement agencies millions for less return than cost.

Also SN needs to maximise aircraft utilisation. Ryanair operates 8 sectors per aircraft per day, SN's average is 6. More revenue needs to be generated to take advantage of fixed costs like overhead, insurance, aircraft leases, office space rentals, etc... It's not hard to plan more early morning departures and there is places in the vicinity like LCY where there is opportunity for such expansion. Reducing rotations by 5 minutes to 35 minutes everywhere is achievable, it saves 40 minutes on an 8 sectors day, equivalent to a one-way take-off to landing to LCY.

[Air Key West]

NCB, you write :

"I find 1300 EUR return to MAD reasonable if the product goes along.
It costs nothing to remove 4 rows of seats, install wires for the seat and install a decent business class seat.
SN needs to start selling returns in Europe for 65 EUR, including taxes, "with free luggage"!"

To say things politely, NCB, as you have shown on this thread and others : you have a lot of imagination, but no sense of reality.

[Vinnie-Winnie]

I must agree that taken from a distance now, it can be said that VEX was a waste of time and money.
Though SN wanted to be taken over by a big airline as shareholders attempted to get rid of their stock, more longhaul to Africa was a higher priority than VEX, instead they went to rescue an airline that was going down anyway to reduce competition. That was one of the bad calls from the board

So you'r telling me that reducing competition on routes was not a good idea? wonder how much more profitable Rome, Madrid, Malaga and others now are now that VEX is gonna

LX has average fleet-wide load factors of 80%. Being an important financial center, ZRH naturally attracts many business class passengers, so they can afford to put a reasonable price tag on their C fares as they get many C bookings.

What you are telling is that LX is not a profit maximising company.( I doubt it) then you say

SN doesn't have this so it is forced to charge the few who book business class as much as they can.
Lower fares will not attract more business passengers.

Which is pretty much saying that lX is lowering fares to attract business passengers.

So either lower fares attract customers or they don't. Butin 2 sentences you are totally contradicting yourself

I find 1300 EUR return to MAD reasonable if the product goes along.

Oh really? Doubt companies think so, and nor do I as a customer...

B.light and B.flex were so-so, now we have disaster on "C".

In my opinion, the C product must be made clearly different from the B.flex offering to attract a new customer basis. Lufthansa, Air France and British Airways have a huge C customer basis, so it was the customer who needed to adapt to the product, until lately when they were forced to reduce their C capacity and increase Y capacity because C customers have all downgraded.
For SN that is not the case, that's why SN must do it differently.

1) C is not a disaster. I've taken it and on the aircraft I was on I had much more legroom, service was better. Honestly I didn't expect much better for a 2 hour long flight
2) What makes you think operates in a totally different market than LH, AF or BA?

It costs nothing to remove 4 rows of seats, install wires for the seat and install a decent business class seat.
It doesn't have to be a full lie-flat, it doesn't need to have a massage function, just something that makes it comfortable to rest.
The Virgin America First product pictured above is 55 inch pitch 21 inch width. That means that 2 rows of 5 seats on a RJ85/100 can become 1 row of 4 seats, while maintaining the aisle and enough space for a bulkhead between the C and Y cabin. The A319's can be converted easily too. If I were SN's board, I would focus on this new C product, install 2 rows on RJ85, 3 rows on RJ100 and A319.

It cost money to buy a seat and to put an aircraft aside

Ryanair can not operate at night at most of their airports and Ryanair does not operate midhaul. Those are markets SN needs to target, hence SN should by combining both, and to increase aircraft utilisation, look for more red eye midhaul routes like CAI and CMN. 3 birds with one stone.

SN can also focus on adding cargo revenue on shorthaul, things that Ryanair and Easyjet will avoid.
Southwest Airlines generates 5% of revenue from cargo.

Ryanair already flies to Marrakesh and Tangier but oh well probably short haul right? Common u don't even know the type of traffic flying between the 2 countries...

But to be really strong, SN must also fight head to head with Ryanair and a possible expansion of Easyjet at BRU, on the products they offer.
I would downgrade B.Flex into a simple Y fare to more LCC-oriented standards, decrease pitch on A319/RJ's enough to add one more row of Y seats. The B.Flex passengers who want more than Y but find it ridiculous to pay more for SN's actual C product when B.Flex is 95% the same, will be happy to pay for a real C seat.
I would offer the possibility to buy very decent on-board catering to all Y passengers (for instance 3 choices of menu for 30 euro with 2 x 20cl drinks) online during the booking process, so that it can be loaded on board together with the C catering and those passengers can be seated to the front of the cabin during the check-in process for easy servicing.
I would sell the flexibility as an option.

You must have analysed the demand for travel in business class very hard. So now tell me hasn't b flex just become what used to be a booking class called economy premium where tickets were exchangable and refundable? that is why they pare more and no-one expects to pay the same for a flexible ticket as for an unflexible one

The "99 EUR return" posters are not impressing anyone anymore. In 90% of the cases, customers are not able to find a 99 EUR return once on SN's website (and become angry!!), and in 90% of cases Ryanair will be selling a ticket for less than 99 EUR return. What do customers do? They no longer take a look on SN's website anymore.
Everyday, 5 000 passengers are choosing to fly with Ryanair over SN between destinations served by both airlines.

or every day, sn still carries on flying on the same destination despite Ryanair's competition. I'm sure they're not doing too bad honestly

SN has all interest in overturning this situation because:
For every Y passenger that will choose SN over Ryanair based on price, FR will lose one customer.
For every customer FR loses, another customer who wants to fly with FR will have to pay more. Though it may not be lucrative for SN immediately, it will be in the long term.
SN needs to start selling returns in Europe for 65 EUR, including taxes, "with free luggage"!

Marketing? One of SN's CEO's should get on TV and declare war to Ryanair with 1 million seats at 65 EUR return over the entire winter.
"with free luggage",
"legroom for human beings, not shrimps" and
"we don't treat you like cattle"
"our passengers will never pay to go to the toilet"
and
"we have Europe's business class of choice"

Timing? Preferrably end of the summer season because there is no point in starting such a campaign in the summer.
What's the point? Cheaper than to pay advertisement agencies millions for less return than cost.

u forget that SN does not have the same business model as FR, nor the same cost, nor the same purpose. 1 million seats are usually sold european wide, which is what 1 or 2 seats a flight?

Also SN needs to maximise aircraft utilisation. Ryanair operates 8 sectors per aircraft per day, SN's average is 6. More revenue needs to be generated to take advantage of fixed costs like overhead, insurance, aircraft leases, office space rentals, etc... It's not hard to plan more early morning departures and there is places in the vicinity like LCY where there is opportunity for such expansion. Reducing rotations by 5 minutes to 35 minutes everywhere is achievable, it saves 40 minutes on an 8 sectors day, equivalent to a one-way take-off to landing to LCY.

[/quote]

BRU - LCY early in the morning? No mrket, nor bus nor economy. Now imagine sending a plane to BRS very early in the moring. Not gonna happen u need to adapt to your business customers not to your thereotical max max utilisation plan.

About fixed costs: Overheads are not fixed costs, they grow as your business grows.


Honestly my friend you have no idea...

[tolipanebas]

So you're telling me that reducing competition on routes was not a good idea? wonder how much more profitable Rome, Madrid, Malaga and others now are now that VEX is gonna.

I think that the reduction of competition through the SN-VEX merger was largely temporarily and is at present only marginal at best. Vueling have increased frequencies on MAD and BCN for instance and Easyjet have taken up routes between BRU and former VEX destinations like BER, MXP, GVA or NCE...
I'd say that fighting Easyjet is a tad more challenging than fighting VEX, yet the disappearance of VEX from the skies has definitely accelerated EZY's entry on the Belgian market.
As such, the merger with VEX not only was a waste of time, it was also not the smartest thing to do from a strategic point of view, as it pulled a weak competitor off the market, only to make room for much stronger ones soon after....

Honestly, the merger with VEX didn't add anything to the core business of SN (long haul to AFI + corporate travelers on European business destinations) and hence the merger was not liked by the then SN management. It was something forcefully imposed by the shareholders however, as they speculated on the fact a larger merged airline would have more critical mass in the market to sex it up for future sale and as such increase shareholders value without need for expansion or investment.
Sadly for them, they'd failed to understand it does matter who you merge with (contrary to their belief) and they have the added bad luck of a surprise economic crisis which is raging in full force.
Both factors will lead to a likely decrease in shareholders value upon selling a merged SN-VEX in 2011, contrary to selling just SN in 2005 already.
Not that I feel sorry for them: I hope they have to sell it for as few as possible: the cheaper LH can get full control of SN, the more money remains with the future owner.

[LJ]

2) What makes you think operates in a totally different market than LH, AF or BA?

For this NCB is correct. Brussels is not a financial center (and the Belgian big banks are either branches of a much larger entity, or very small regional oriented banks). OK, the EU (and its lobbyists) create a lot of premium traffic, but again, being a financial center is much more lucrative (even after the financial crisis).

About fixed costs: Overheads are not fixed costs, they grow as your business grows.

This is incorrect. Overhead can be considered a fixed cost (just as an aircraft). Unlike true variable costs, fixed costs do not grow unless you reach the maximum capacity of the asset (which is the case for overhead). There is no direct correlation between cost increase and growing of business. The increase in fixed costs go always step by step.

[Vinnie-Winnie]

For this NCB is correct. Brussels is not a financial center (and the Belgian big banks are either branches of a much larger entity, or very small regional oriented banks). OK, the EU (and its lobbyists) create a lot of premium traffic, but again, being a financial center is much more lucrative (even after the financial crisis).

That I know. My point is that if companies tend to avoid business class in France, UK & Germany it will be no different in Belgium

This is incorrect. Overhead can be considered a fixed cost (just as an aircraft). Unlike true variable costs, fixed costs do not grow unless you reach the maximum capacity of the asset (which is the case for overhead). There is no direct correlation between cost increase and growing of business. The increase in fixed costs go always step by step.

That is all very well in theory, but imagine that you have a printer that for example prints out flight crew rosters. We can agree that a printing cost can be classified as an overhead I think Now whar happens to printing costs go up? Overhead go up, as simple as that.

There are many examples like that. Google it if you want, but I am talking about a real example here

As such, the merger with VEX not only was a waste of time, it was also not the smartest thing to do from a strategic point of view, as it pulled a weak competitor off the market, only to make room for much stronger ones soon after....

You have a point, but I still think that overall SN abyssimal market share at BRU has increased thanks to this merger. Now this foreign carriers obviously didn't serve BRU before so they gained as well, but in terms economic benefit I tend to believe that SN made a good move. Now I don't have any financial source to calculate the benefit of buying VEX so only guessing here

[NCB]

VW, I had prepared a good reply but it got erased.
To answer the seat count argument, it is approximately the first 11% of Y on each flight that would get sold at rock bottom fare of 65EUR return. After that, SN could use a gradually increased fare with reducing available capacity. 65EUR return, increasing to 85, 105, 125, 155 and then more typical fares.
Of course, they don't need to offer as many cheap capacity on the routes that they are already filling at good yields. Ryanair also has different fares depending on destination.

Further, the C modification will cost a little bit of money but it can be done during annual C-Checks. It wouldn't be worth doing the modification on aircraft that have less than 24 months to stay in the fleet, needless to say the new aircraft need to come equipped with the seats.

Those longhaul full lie-flats with all the IFE and gadgets cost alot of money and break down alot but the Recaro-style (aircraft-certified of course) without the IFE, the massage function and even a mechanical reclining with springs instead of electrical, kind of like your typical reclining living room armchair shouldn't be too big an investment.
A couple million euro's to redo most of the fleet of aircraft that is staying through 2013 and after.

[cnc]

no offence NCB but on a 1 or 2 hour flight i doubt its worth the costs to allow business or first class seats to go flat. its not like they will try to sleep on a short haul flight. They work on their laptop so a power-in would be more appreciated

[NCB]

No offence received, everyone is entitled to his opinion.

Alot of people sleep in the airplane. The lower cabin pressure and lack of activity induce sleepyness.
In my opinion, it's not only for sleeping but it is generally more comfortable to have a full recline (no lie-flat needed) and foot-rest that comes up. It is a matter of comfort, which is way better than to sit almost straight-up. After 30 minutes, it gets very irritating to have nothing to lean on so many window seat pax start leaning on the window panels. The idea is that to sell well, it must be something special.

Comparatively, it's not necessary to have champagne, a full meal and a Belgian chocolate for a 1 hour flight, but it's there because it's part of a product.

Of course, a power plug is a must-have.
I predict that in the not too distant future, wifi acces will also become part of a standard must-have gadget for all airlines.

[fets]

I predict that in the not too distant future, wifi acces will also become part of a standard must-have gadget for all airlines.

I was able to try it the in-flight internet on a US Airways flight yesterday on one of their A321's and have to say that I like it very much. It's easy to use, fast and responsive. And first-time free Too bad they don't offer power-outlets (not even in domestic first). My laptop battery ran out before arrival..

They are using Gogoinflight Internet which seems to be the standard for US-based carriers..

[RoMax]

Not really on-toppic but I think it's stuppid to start a new topic for this:

AeroTech Services said its EASA and US FAA-verified Wing Modification System has reduced fuel burn aboard a Brussels Airlines 737-400 by an average of 2.7% during cruise. Brussels Airlines will outfit the remainder of its -400 fleet with the modification, which increases an aircraft's wing area and camber and lengthens the chord, increasing lift-to-drag ratio.

http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engines-c ... -news-0514

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

Okay more off-topic , but moderator may be placed in topic 'fleet renewal or so..'

Brussels Airlines will outfit the remainder of its -400 fleet with the modification,

Oh my God,
better to look for a decent plane instead of some modifications!!
Flown with OO-VES last week to BCN, what a mess !
Okay I was in Blight but plane was OLD,DIRTY and way not comfortable !!
If I compare with Ryanair B737-800 and Easyjet A319, they lost the fight!
IMHO if SN want to grow these planes must leave the fleet QUICK.
Since I saw the loadfactor on this flight an A320 it's just the thing they need and the second hand
market it's full of it ( I guess ).
Replacements of AVRO can start later these birds have comfort but the B737-400 no way..
Even preferred the smaller B737-300 OO-VEH on my way back !

Can't imagine how SN want to compete other carriers,
SN has punctuality,transit possibilities ,network, after sales dealing ( 'nazorg' just in case ) compared with EZY.
But EZY has better fares, even/better service on board (compared with Blight), so for PtoP flights
they will have a big competor on EZY as they decide to grow more in BRU ( as promised some months ago).
FR , don't start this discussion again but if they once join also a EZY -way to handle their flights..

CX-B
Just started a little bit worrying for SN taking these things and KLM to Rwanda in mind !

[RoMax]

Hi,

Okay more off-topic , but moderator may be placed in topic 'fleet renewal or so..'

Brussels Airlines will outfit the remainder of its -400 fleet with the modification,

Oh my God,
better to look for a decent plane instead of some modifications!!
Flown with OO-VES last week to BCN, what a mess !
Okay I was in Blight but plane was OLD,DIRTY and way not comfortable !!
If I compare with Ryanair B737-800 and Easyjet A319, they lost the fight!
IMHO if SN want to grow these planes must leave the fleet QUICK.
Since I saw the loadfactor on this flight an A320 it's just the thing they need and the second hand
market it's full of it ( I guess ).
Replacements of AVRO can start later these birds have comfort but the B737-400 no way..
Even preferred the smaller B737-300 OO-VEH on my way back !

Can't imagine how SN want to compete other carriers,
SN has punctuality,transit possibilities ,network, after sales dealing ( 'nazorg' just in case ) compared with EZY.
But EZY has better fares, even/better service on board (compared with Blight), so for PtoP flights
they will have a big competor on EZY as they decide to grow more in BRU ( as promised some months ago).
FR , don't start this discussion again but if they once join also a EZY -way to handle their flights..

CX-B
Just started a little bit worrying for SN taking these things and KLM to Rwanda in mind !

I aggree with you. I recently went to Athens with SN in their B734's and they are worse, seriously worse. The loadfactor was wonderfull and with 2/3 travelling in b-flex and b business not bad at all. The service was good and the offered food was very good (b-flex). Only a two things, all the prerecorded tapes were about the Boeing 737-300. But the airplane itself The airplanes was nicly cleaned but the seats were not comfortable and the legg room dramatic.
So good for SN that they look a fuel consumption but I hope they have plans to remove some seat rows in the remaining 737's for the time they stay in service.

[sdbelgium]

Only a two things, all the prerecorded tapes were about the Boeing 737-300. But the airplane itself The airplanes was nicly cleaned but the seats were not comfortable and the legg room dramatic.

Same thing happened to me on a recent flight to MAD. Flight attendants were looking at each other in confusion when the amount of overwing exits was mentioned.

[RoMax]

In a news article about Lufthansa and the first A380 flight with the german national soccer team, there is a small part about the stake of LH in SN.
A LH spokesman said that LH will soon (probably April 2011, because from than they can use their option for the remaining 55%)acquire the 100% of SN to reinforce their position as largest European airline.
I think this is logical for most of us, but some still doubt that LH will acquire the remaining 55% already that fast. But that's just the best for LH (and SN).

khaleejtimes.com

[NCB]

A Lufthansa spokesman said the German group, which currently has only 49 per cent stake in Brussels airline, would soon be acquiring 100 per cent of shares to reinforce its position as Europe’s largest airline group and the second largest in the world.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArti ... may430.xml

[LAGPanoramic]

B.light and B.flex were so-so, now we have disaster on "C".

I have flown a few times with B.light, without any regrets. And although I never booked B.flex, I have considered it every time, having been very close to book it once. For me they can stay as they are now!

Marketing? One of SN's CEO's should get on TV and declare war to Ryanair with 1 million seats at 65 EUR return over the entire winter.
"with free luggage",
"legroom for human beings, not shrimps" and
"we don't treat you like cattle"
"our passengers will never pay to go to the toilet"
and
"we have Europe's business class of choice"

Timing? Preferrably end of the summer season because there is no point in starting such a campaign in the summer.
What's the point? Cheaper than to pay advertisement agencies millions for less return than cost.

I must admit that this makes some sense to me. It's a good thing to do to point out what you do better than your main competitor, but you are contradicting yourself. Here above, you say that one thing that is better at SN is the legroom, while you stated earlier in your same post that SN should just reduce seat pitch!!! See here below how you explained it...

But to be really strong, SN must also fight head to head with Ryanair and a possible expansion of Easyjet at BRU, on the products they offer.
I would downgrade B.Flex into a simple Y fare to more LCC-oriented standards, decrease pitch on A319/RJ's enough to add one more row of Y seats. The B.Flex passengers who want more than Y but find it ridiculous to pay more for SN's actual C product when B.Flex is 95% the same, will be happy to pay for a real C seat.
I would offer the possibility to buy very decent on-board catering to all Y passengers (for instance 3 choices of menu for 30 euro with 2 x 20cl drinks) online during the booking process, so that it can be loaded on board together with the C catering and those passengers can be seated to the front of the cabin during the check-in process for easy servicing.
I would sell the flexibility as an option.

And now for everybody PLEASE, there are several people (including myself) reading this forum who don't know any (or just the most important ones, like I do) airport and airline codes. Can I urgently ask everyone to use the full names of airport and airlines please??? Because not understanding the point is sometimes frustrating. Thanks!

[cnc]

And now for everybody PLEASE, there are several people (including myself) reading this forum who don't know any (or just the most important ones, like I do) airport and airline codes. Can I urgently ask everyone to use the full names of airport and airlines please??? Because not understanding the point is sometimes frustrating. Thanks!

the majority here works in the aviation industry so they are used to use iata or icao codes (like an electrician uses for example 11kVA and not 11000 volt ampere) so imo its up to you to look it up and not the other way around. You can use http://www.airlinecodes.co.uk/home.asp but its not 100% uptodate (like FH is still futura in its database)