Air Key West wrote:if/when TAM leaves Star Alliance, Star could use some new capacity between Europe and Brazil.
crew1990 wrote:Actually, if TAP left star alliance one day, it would be nice for SN to fly to Sao Paulo indeed.
Hi Crew1990 ! There might have been a confusing. I was mentioning TAM possibily leaving Star Alliance. It is being rumored that because of the LAN/TAM (LATAM) merger, TAM will join oneworld of which LAN is already a member.
You reacted by referring to TAP (not TAM). If you meant TAP, well, of course, TAP could leave Star Alliance, too. The privatizing process of the airline has been suspended by the Portuguese government and will be re-opened some time this year. If after the sale of TAP, the airline leaves Star Alliance, there will be an even greater need for new Star Alliance capacity to Brazil.
crew1990 wrote:Yes I was meaning TAP Portugal and the fact they could be leaving Star Alliance after their privatitation regarding the new owner.
The privatisation failed anyway, for now. But one of the requirements of the government was that TAP would remain in Star Alliance (resulting in IAG for example pulling back and not making a formal bid). LH was/is not interested in TAP, but if there was/is the risk to lose them to Sky or Oneworld, I'm sure they would go after it, they can't risk to lose TAP after TAM.
But with or without TAP, that will not make the slightest difference for SN. The market will become too big to serve it just out of LIS and the big Star-hubs of FRA/MUC/ZRH. So SN should look at it, but not now, not yet.
You can speculate as long as you want and everybody can write exactly the same in every single post but two things are important:
1) SN has to survive. Do not forget that this is still a company in trouble. Anyone saw the bilan? Exactly. If they fly under LH or not, doen't matter. first this company has to be healthy again.
Do you forget already D-Day of SN a couple of weeks ago. If the result was negative then there was no IAd and even no company anymore.
1) forget all those exotic destinations we saw here. Priority of SN is Africa and North-America. There is for this company the potential. And as we can see N-A is working for them, so a good choice. All other distinations are way to risky and not for this company.
Dreaming is nice but we are not talking about Emirates here.
So, both feed on the ground please, we are talking about aviation. Many people tried to be rich in this business but they burned their hands.
HIi Atlantis !
I don't know if you were re erring to RIo and GRU when you said "forget exotic destinations". Whatever, those who think of Latin America as exotic destinations stilll live the 20th century. Sao Paulo is the economic capital of South America and Panama is now the financial capital of Central America. The future is i.a. in the BRIC countries. To me, destinations lile Bamako (already suspended by b.air), Monrovia or Banjul sound much more exotic.
I think we all agree that b.air should continue to focus on Africa with a number of (also feeder flights) from the US.
I personally don't think SN should venture beyond the East Coast (with perhaps the excpetion of YUL, a missed opportunity). Other opportunities outside SN's "historical" or traditional turf should not be missed, since it has been recognised that profits come from well-chosen long haul operations.
Don't forget that we are not, here, in a Board room. Sorry to repeat myself, we are a bunch od aviation enthusiasts who like to exchange points of views and ideas. And of course, some of us will be wrong in some of their ideas or suggestions, just like the Board and the management of b.air have made mistakes in the past (which is much more serious).
Air Key West wrote:HIi Atlantis !
I don't know if you were re erring to RIo and GRU when you said "forget exotic destinations". Whatever, those who think of Latin America as exotic destinations stilll live the 20th century. Sao Paulo is the economic capital of South America and Panama is now the financial capital of Central America. The future is i.a. in the BRIC countries. To me, destinations lile Bamako (already suspended by b.air), Monrovia or Banjul sound much more exotic.
I think we all agree that b.air should continue to focus on Africa with a number of (also feeder flights) from the US.
I personally don't think SN should venture beyond the East Coast (with perhaps the excpetion of YUL, a missed opportunity). Other opportunities outside SN's "historical" or traditional turf should not be missed, since it has been recognised that profits come from well-chosen long haul operations.
Don't forget that we are not, here, in a Board room. Sorry to repeat myself, we are a bunch od aviation enthusiasts who like to exchange points of views and ideas. And of course, some of us will be wrong in some of their ideas or suggestions, just like the Board and the management of b.air have made mistakes in the past (which is much more serious).
Quite correct.
How can an airline like SN choose for exotic destinations like Palermo, Banjul, Agadir .. and not for business places like Sao Paulo, Warsaw (..). And Asia.
