Brussels Airlines new plan

[OO-ITR]

to offer its companies a landing fee of 2 euros against 28 in Brussels Airport national

Maybe we can start thinking for ourself and not always accept what politician want to make us belief and ask ourself how CRL can 'offer' landing fees of 2 euro and Brussels Airport not...

[Flanker2]

Maybe we can start thinking for ourself and not always accept what politician want to make us belief and ask ourself how CRL can 'offer' landing fees of 2 euro and Brussels Airport not...

Maybe because BRU sold it off to MAP, instead of de-nationalising or regionalising the airport, which would have been equally ok for the EU. They went for the quick buck and now they have to pump money back in

The considered way of offering this bail-out offers the same conditions to Jetair, Thomas Cook, TNT, Abelag, Flying Group. BUT it will be particularly interesting for VG who works with a reverse hub system...

So how can the government make sure that most of these 20 millions go to SN?
There is no way.


The best way to bail them out is to nationalize some of the services at the airport. For instance, nationalise airport passenger security at BRU (it can be done on the grounds that it's a national airport and that the state wants to supervise its own security. Existing examples: TSA of USA) and to subcontract it back to the current security subcontractor as a government contract.
This way, BRU can decrease its taxes by the same amount as it affects its bottom line.
That brings the 28€ closer to the 2€ and BRU can decide how they spread the savings (for instance keep 28€ for foreign carriers who fly 2 times daily and decrease for SN to 10€ as it's the largest carrier).

Other ways to reduce BRU costs:
-nationalize firefighting services (equipment costs quite a lot of money),
-reduce Belgocontrol charges related to the usage of the airport, focus more on charging for airspace use.
If that still poses a ATC funding problem, they can start charging for upper airspace usage, independently from ATM charges collected by Eurocontrol, on grounds of:
-air pollution (aircraft exhaust CO² but also CO and kerosine residue)
-sky view pollution (Belgium's sky is full of ugly contrails),
-risk: an airplane that flies over a country poses a financial risk to that country as that country would suffer financial damage (rescue costs, rebuilding and environmental remediation cost, investigation and justice costs) in case of a crash or falling parts,
-increased costs to Belgocontrol ATM due to saturation of Upper area

Such charge would desaturate the Belgian upper area and allow Belgian airlines to climb faster to enter the UAC much sooner, thus reducing their fuel costs.

Another thing that Belgian airlines and government can do is to work together on a collective fuel purchasing scheme to reduce the aviation fuel bill. By purchasing the aviation fuel as a single combined contract, both the government and the airlines can save big.

I could go on forever...

[OO-ITR]

to offer its companies a landing fee of 2 euros against 28 in Brussels Airport national

Maybe we can start thinking for ourself and not always accept what politician want to make us belief and ask ourself how CRL can 'offer' landing fees of 2 euro and Brussels Airport not...

or asks ourselves how many airports 'offer' landing fees of 2 euro. I'm afraid it's going to be a very short list

[FlightMate]

Come on. The Flemish government wants to regionalize more competences, and then complains when an already regional airport gets better results than the national one.

Politicians will be politicians...

[Acid-drop]

to offer its companies a landing fee of 2 euros against 28 in Brussels Airport national

Maybe we can start thinking for ourself and not always accept what politician want to make us belief and ask ourself how CRL can 'offer' landing fees of 2 euro and Brussels Airport not...

How can skoda make a car that looks and feels like an audi for half the price ? It's the same logic here. They have different margins. CRL could even be 0 euro, all free for all, if they make enough money with parking to pay the heating of the terminal ... If their goal is to attract new jobs and more tourists without making money, it's their problem. It's a choice that many regional airport in europe made. BRU don't like it, ok, their choice. But it's not BRU against CRL here. It's all high-level airport against all low-fares airport.

[sn26567]

The Polish government is working on a much higher level and will provide 100 million euros to LOT. This amount could even reach 250 million euros after some savings are achieved (job cuts and other cost cutting measures).

And now the CEO of LOT Marcin Pirog has been dismissed because of those heavy losses requiring injection of fresh money by the main shareholder, the Polish State.

The 93% state-owned carrier has lost PLN 2.8 billion (EUR 700 million) in the last 12 years and has had 10 chief executives in the same amount of time...!

If I were Bernard Gustin, I'd not be reassured...

[superfly]

Let's just start charging regional airports for their use of Belgocontrol's services so BRU doesn't have to carry that burden alone...

[BelgoPilot]

This topic is (again) turning in a politic and off-topic debate...

Half of this topic is about politics and the regional airports helps or subsidies or... call it like you want.

But this topic is about "Brussels Airlines new plan", just check the title.

What has the new plan about Brussels Airlines have to do with Charleroi Airport Vs Brussels Airport?
We are talking about peers and apples.

I will not discuss about Thomas Cook that has some difficulties but let's talk about JetairFly then...
It flies mainly from BRU, like Brussels Airlines, and they are growing and investing: new aircrafts, new building, ...

So to make short:

1) Ryanair is competing with JetairFly as well and JetairFly is keeping on growing and making money. Both from BRU and from CRL.
2) If Brussels Airlines wants to have the CRL subsidies, let's move part to CRL. We all know it is not going to be tomorrow.
3) The request to stop or the complain about the subsidies at one airport should not come from an airline (like this is the case) but should come from an airport. This makes me think to a child crying for something he wants and that someone else receives.
4) I am also for equal rules, but as I am not a politic specialist and as it is a sensitive case, I will not continue on that way.

[fcw]

So now that BruAir is receiving state aid AGAIN (from 2001 to 2010 about 20% of the salaries of crew salaries were given back as a discount on social security) will BruAir lower its huge airline fees?
For those whining about regional airports not paying Belgocontrol: this is a myth! Only a small part of the regional traffic, ie the pre 1990 traffic volume, is handled for free all the other traffic is payable.

[Nevihta]

Let's just start charging regional airports for their use of Belgocontrol's services so BRU doesn't have to carry that burden alone...

Let's just start taking right information about that stuff instead of repeating political propaganda...

[airazurxtror]

Only a small part of the regional traffic, ie the pre 1990 traffic volume, is handled for free all the other traffic is payable.

And the regions have to pay the surplus.
The Région Wallonne pay 6,6 million euros each year for the Belgocontrol work, as its traffic has increased since 1989.
In 1989, the main regional traffic was at Ostend.The Flemish Region has thus nothing to pay as there is no increase in traffic since 1989.
(Brussels Airport is a Federal airport, not a regional one).

[Squelsh]

And the regions have to pay the surplus.
The Région Wallonne pay 6,6 million euros each year for the Belgocontrol work, as its traffic has increased since 1989.

Where did you pull this one from, other than out of your ass where you seem to store your knowledge? Press reports from (yes more than one) political parties last days are indicating the totally opposite. You have a relibale source for these figures?

[fcw]

And the regions have to pay the surplus.
The Région Wallonne pay 6,6 million euros each year for the Belgocontrol work, as its traffic has increased since 1989.

Where did you pull this one from, other than out of your ass where you seem to store your knowledge? Press reports from (yes more than one) political parties last days are indicating the totally opposite. You have a relibale source for these figures?

They are correct squelch, Belgocontrol IS paid for the regional traffic volume except the pre 1990 volume. It is not BRU Airport nor BruAir who is paying for it.
Did you ever hear one political party say the governement was subsidising 20% of the crew salaries between 2001 and 2010? Go to the Belgian State Gazette do a search and look for yourself...
OFF TOPIC: It would be nice if you would remain polite!

[Acid-drop]

Omg some people will not have anything to talk about now...

Ok i give you one : the euro commission wants to refuse the 20 millions euro help ( from today canalz journal)

[RoMax]

Ok i give you one : the euro commission wants to refuse the 20 millions euro help ( from today canalz journal)

They want Belgium to show the taken measurements to the EU for investigation. Otherwise they can start a procedure to stop it, as they don't know the details of the plan (to see if they are 100% up to EU rules).
That's something totally different...

[airazurxtror]

Where did you pull this one from, other than out of your ass where you seem to store your knowledge?
You have a relibale source for these figures?

"Le Soir", today, page 27.
Had a bad day at work ?

[Squelsh]

"Le Soir", today, page 27.
Had a bad day at work ?

Oh yea.. The most neutral newspaper in the country nuffsaid

And yea, work is busting balls today, thanks to customs strike at brucargo

[liege-bierset]

"Le Soir", today, page 27.
Had a bad day at work ?

Oh yea.. The most neutral newspaper in the country nuffsaid

And yea, work is busting balls today, thanks to customs strike at brucargo

An other "unreliable" source...for Mr Smarty-pants :
http://www.rtbf.be/info/belgique/detail ... id=7892739
Or better:
http://www.tijd.be/nieuws/ondernemingen ... 20airlines

[Squelsh]

"Le Soir", today, page 27.
Had a bad day at work ?

Oh yea.. The most neutral newspaper in the country nuffsaid

And yea, work is busting balls today, thanks to customs strike at brucargo

An other "unreliable" source...for Mr Smarty-pants :
http://www.rtbf.be/info/belgique/detail ... id=7892739
Or better:
http://www.tijd.be/nieuws/ondernemingen ... 20airlines

Smart enough to read your source and find nothing about the 6,6 million euros mentioned..

[flightlover]

Only a small part of the regional traffic, ie the pre 1990 traffic volume, is handled for free all the other traffic is payable.

And the regions have to pay the surplus.
The Région Wallonne pay 6,6 million euros each year for the Belgocontrol work, as its traffic has increased since 1989.
In 1989, the main regional traffic was at Ostend.The Flemish Region has thus nothing to pay as there is no increase in traffic since 1989.
(Brussels Airport is a Federal airport, not a regional one).

One last comment on this and then ill shut up about it.

First: A regional airport is only excluded from paying the full Belgocontrol fare if they have less than 50000 commercial movements a year.

CRL however has over 80000 movements/year.

I don't think you are going to say there are over 30000 non commercial movements each year at CRL.

Second: If the The Région Wallonne is paying for ATC, as you say they are. They are subsidizing traffic at CRL. And by doing so, distorting the level playing field. (And yes they do this with money they don't have as they still have a deficit)

Who complains has more to do with who is disadvantaged in the end. If it's the airport they can do that. However as these costs are also paid for by the users of the airport (in normal cases) they also have the right to complain about the existing situation.