It's easy to say that other are making mistakes - but what if ITA would look more towards Africa and prove that they can do it better?
There was an article in Corriere della Sera in which CEO Eberhart stated that the flights to DKR and ACC, operated by an A321LR, were not performing as expected. So not sure if they can do it better.
Starting in June, SN will operate a night stop in MUC. Does anyone know how much lower the crew costs are at SN compared to LH?
It seems there is a more general problem with the A321LR since 2 of them seem to be on the ground for more than 6 months and some are just doing 'regular' short flights in Europe. Not sure why you would need those for short flights, very costly I assume ...
The 321LR ITA has were leased with the intention to offer a premium cabin product towards Middle East routes -Saudi Arabia, Emirates, Oman etc. Thee markets were not working well, so the fleet had to be used on additional legs with some premium demand eg Tel Aviv ( also problematic now) and by not having other alternatives on high volume European routes , towards London and Paris, where ITA does not have A321 to match demand.
Furthermore they have as well the problematic PW engines.
They tried to allocate them for 2 African destinations as well and the outcome was that the readiness to pay for Premium was not given - this confirms the sweet spot Brussels is operating as well, focusing on lower yield ethnic demand with typical needs eg add on luggage etc.
This tells also that if ITA would look further into Africa, they may do this with 339 and if SN would like to take the 321LR subfleet and build a business case around it, this won't be Africa but rather the East Coast.
It's easy to say that other are making mistakes - but what if ITA would look more towards Africa and prove that they can do it better?
There was an article in Corriere della Sera in which CEO Eberhart stated that the flights to DKR and ACC, operated by an A321LR, were not performing as expected. So not sure if they can do it better.
Starting in June, SN will operate a night stop in MUC. Does anyone know how much lower the crew costs are at SN compared to LH?
It’s not about crew cost but more about aircraft availabilty at Lufthansa.This is temporary
TimTam wrote: 22 Apr 2026, 21:57
Strange that nobody has an explanation. I will try I wild guess to attract answers : bad (LH) management (overall).
What about simple economics?
Brussels delivered in 2025 an EBIT of 1,7% from sales. Cost discipline would have been key regardless of any other evolution.
Several airlines are cutting flights and try to re-focus their summer schedules towards intra european leisure, if possible.
Let's also face reality : Brussels does not have a long haul leisure offering that can offset a weaker demand on traditional routes.
It's easy to say that other are making mistakes - but what if ITA would look more towards Africa and prove that they can do it better?
And if parts of the tiny wins in 2024 were bookeeping gains coming from sales and lease back, you would understand that Brussels is still an airline that needs some more efficiency improvements.
I can follow you on most of your reasoning, but if "Brussels is still an airline that needs some more efficiency improvements", have you an idea of the necessary efficiency improvements and why are they not implemented ? Just a question for information...
Just the insiders would know exactly where the hardest spots to work on are. The industry itself has as any industry certain benchmarks and it can be identified where in an activity a company is above or below.
As in any business, each coin has two sides and it can improve some parameters but brings some risk at others.
Being a network airline / and there were several voices speaking against conslidation Brussles into Eurowings / means flying in hub and spoke waves instead of steady return trips. This is decreasing the average utilisation time of the aircraft per day.
Having the right aircraft also helps, provided one can fill them at decent yields. Here we can say that the 319 with their 141 configuration are economically outdated and can't be improved ( you need the 2 emergency exit doors above the wings to install 150 seats). There is action here with the 320NEOs coming in, but evolutionary.
Some of the busiest routes from the catchment area are furthermore not served by Brussels Airlines, and in the hands of the LCCs . Top 5 routes from Charleroi are Bucharest, Tirana, Budapest, Manchester, Milan. From BRU some top destinations are P2P such as Barcelona or Madrid and some can beexploited jointly eg Rome. But the question is if Brussels can and/or want to serve these P2P markets as well and if there is money on the table at its cost structure.
As fuel makes 50% of the long haul operating cost, there is always a trade off between capitel expenses on new aircraft and operating older models if fuel cost ist not a constraint.
If we benchmark Austrian Airlines, they were not ahving so good years in the Mid 2010, as they were still looking to maintain their regio fleet and interesting wise they improved after streamlining operations on short haul. Would be interesting to see their long haul roll over. Another very interesting poit is that on their long haul the premium economy class is very popular and overweighted eg compared to Lufthansa. Maybe this could be an inspiration for Brussels as well.
And i think that with the reduction of TUI in Belgium, some leisure options could be something the company may be able to capitalize.But this is just guess.
oldblueeyes wrote: 25 Apr 2026, 18:35
And i think that with the reduction of TUI in Belgium, some leisure options could be something the company may be able to capitalize.But this is just guess.
Kinda related, SN met this week with the Ambassador of Albania and Tirana Airport.
oldblueeyes wrote: 25 Apr 2026, 18:35
And i think that with the reduction of TUI in Belgium, some leisure options could be something the company may be able to capitalize. But this is just guess.
Premium leisure routes, eg ALC, AGP, PMI, … are well served and the profitability of secondary leisure routes is rather limited.
To answer TT: in the actual conditions consolidate into profitable routes is the best a marginally profitable airline can do imho.
Of course, it's always exciting to fly new destinations!
It would make also sense if the same crew flew after to Hongkong and operate return flight wit SFD...
Bel33 wrote: 26 Apr 2026, 16:50
Of course, it's always exciting to fly new destinations!
It would make also sense if the same crew flew after to Hongkong and operate return flight wit SFD...
I think that's far more complicated then it looks at first sight (operational, duty times, legal, cost, ...).
