Atlantis wrote:Via SN LH is manipulating the market now to take away as much as possible clients from BRU to transport them via FRA, DUS or MUC. This is not in the benefit of the customer.The best example. SN dropped WAW and KRK.
Oké, they are significant markets no longer served by Brussels and that will likely have its reasons.
The opposite has happened too: Scandinavian colleagues of mine now fly to BRU to go to BRS because there are no longer (direct) Lufthansa flights from FRA for instance. (they used to fly SAS to FRA, then LH to BRS)
Which is why I say it's all part of a bigger internal rationalisation process and yes, that will mean less direct flights sadly. If we want frequency in future, it seems we will have to compromise on the routing sometimes: as a multinational, you just can't increase your efficiency and drive down your costs compared to your competitors, if you don't consolidate and make use of your size benefit: simple as that.
Atlantis wrote:Hmm mr Inquirer, think before you write something like this. With my experience in working at the airport, with working afterwards for a very big multinational, with working for companies who were in a big crisis, I know what I'm talking about.
I am not questioning anyvbody's knowledge, just noticing there seems to be an awful lot of people around here who think that somehow Brussels Airlines should be accomodated by its shareholders to do all things it sees a market for, even though the shareholders are often doing them already through more established brands they also own: please note how that doesn't make much sense, does it?
Better have Brussels concentrate on things which are new and thus provide new revenue sources, rather than just wasting time and money on shifting revenues between the diffferent branches and entities owned by its shareholders, especially as it would require heavy investments to achieve that and you also risk distroying yields in the competitive process that follows the period when an established brand vacates the playing field.
Atlantis wrote:We are not bashing here at SN. No, not at all, we only, and some other also have experience in aviation, we could add something what maybe can help this company. From time to time they don't even see the simple solution.
As I've already tried to make clear: consider the bigger picture.
Things will make far more sense and often provide you with an obvious answer as to why certain things are just the way they are and not the way you (and I) would like them to be.
Maybe it would be a good 'self-check' to see if what is propose isn't already done by others within the group and in case the answer is no, whether it can't likely be done cheaper by any other either?
If the answer is no two times, then you may have a good suggestion to which shareholders are going to be receptive, but the idea of building a regional European network at BRU when you have a huge hub like FRA just next door which can offer much more feeding opportunities and has much of that regional network already in place, seems not to fall in that category, expect maybe for some additional UK or French regional airports which are missing from the LH group time table.
Atlantis wrote:You wrote that SN is not an airline who can't fly to regions. Can you tell us why? Those regions are full of potential customers like Rotterdam, Orly and many others. And you know, those regions are asking for direct connections with BRU. Rotterdam is also asking for it lately. when there is a demand, there is potentional.
As you say: the opportunity is now filled by Lufthansa which can connect RTM to I maybe ten times more European destinations and 20 times more long haul destinations than at BRU, so why should they have given RTM to Brussels and not to Lufthansa? I'd really like to see a convincing argument for that, if you please?
Atlantis wrote:If it don't fit to the strategy of LH then they are sick and have not good intentions with SN.
But sir, you can't expect Lufthansa to simply close their shop and move everything to Brussels, just because they have invested in them, can you? Whatever comes to BRU must make more sense than when done by themselves or by other airlines they own, otherwise it will go elsewhere: simple as that.
You say you work for a multinational? In that case, what I am saying should ring a large bell to you, because any company running different production sites at once has the same balancing act to undertake.
