BRU-based World class airline

DC7-C · Post by **DC7-C** » 31 Dec 2004, 17:32

What would it take to make a BRU- based world class airline, I mean something like the KL, EK, CX, or SQ?
That company should also be making money, unlike the old Sabena which very rarely made profit.

sn-remember · Post by **sn-remember** » 04 Jan 2005, 14:26

My dear DC7-C your question is difficult but that is no reason why you shound'nt get some reply though unfortunately no "off the shelf" answer.

But first of all don't be too cruel to defunct Sabena whose accounts were not worst -far from it- than those of other state owned carriers.

But your question refers to the present ... or does it?
KL for example was a pionneer in air transport as Sabena was.
SQ seems more "recent" since it resulted from the split of former MalaysiaSingapore" Airlines around 1970. But the joint operation of the father airline was already favorable to the Singapore base.
CX is relatively more recent (I tink it started ops in the 60s) anyway on the lucrative HKG-LON route.
And EK is probably the exception in air transport , a new-comer playing among the "greats"... with considerable financial means.

SQ, CX and EK are all benefiting from a sustained growth in air traffic since decades in asia in general and more specifically around their "bases" which serve as important hubs in the region.
KL on the other hand enjoys the rewards of a long and thoughtful and accurate development/consolidation process that we can envy at BRU.

All theses successful companies (you can add AF,LH, BA and some more...maybe not so many) enjoyed a similar development of their airport base; being neighboors, we can think about Schiphol which was consistently and cleverly sold as an international gateway , much better than BRU ever was despite their shared trump cards (same EU centrally located highly populated and developped region).

So What would it take ...?
In my humble opinion

1. cleverness, willingness , toughness , cohesion (all actors agree on the objective and cooperate whatever the difficulties having confidence in the quality of their human environment)

2. convince investors (people taking the risk to bet on a "daring" project)
This supposes a very credible indeed environment.

3. prove you were right (then you can conclude some further key alliance)
This means you managed to acquire a name in the industry as well as an encouraging result.
WooooooAAAAAAwwwwww !

As you can see the first steps are obviously the most difficult and lengthy to succeed and that's why most successful airlines today started this process some time ago and also why too many "new comers" don't remain in business .
(I am thinking of late BritishCaledonian for ex. which I believe had many of those qualities that made it succeed in its early days but failed to consolidate into convincing partnerships)

But in my view it should be possible to grow from the basis you have,
being not too bold neither too coy but finding the adequate development pace at any given time. I think that BMI ? or OS ? could be a good example on that regards ?

But I am just a humble spectator of the airline industry and by no means a lecturer in one of our "elite" universities ...

TCAS_climb · Post by **TCAS_climb** » 04 Jan 2005, 14:37

When you're 1h flight time away from the mega-hubs of Paris, London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt, what do you expect ?

Who needs a fifth hub in such a small area ?

SicilianFalcon · Post by **SicilianFalcon** » 04 Jan 2005, 15:25

Everyone .. if you make it a better option?

8) Forza

Advisor · Post by **Advisor** » 04 Jan 2005, 17:03

In aviation the options are endless.

regi · Post by **regi** » 04 Jan 2005, 18:07

I think we have already quite some very big names landing on Zaventem.
Lufthansa, British, KLM, Swiss, Austrian, Alitalia, Delta,...
But we had Thai and Singapore as well. (untill last year, the Singapore-Brussels- Manchester flight)
Sabena disappeared.
Air France is now a railway company. (I hear laughter)

What would it take?
The dismantling of the old boys network. The sell of Biac is probably one of the last major steps for a complete renaissance of Zaventem airport. (can somebody answer what the socialist politician LVDB is doing in the board of directors?)
Allow Belgians to work for those foreign airlines , employed according Swiss law or registered in Ireland. Why? So employees get the same nett income as a Emirates employee, without costing too much to the employer. I mention here specifically Emirates because Belgians are considered as prime employees because of their language skills and labour mentality and loyalty. Young Belgians like to work for Emirates because they get a free appartment in Dubai and don't have to pay taxes.
Belgians are the employees which stay the longest at Emirates.

Oh, it all goes about the money?
Well, I think this is the major item in this entire game: money.

Post by **Bruspotter** » 04 Jan 2005, 19:02

Hello

Indeed it's sad that their isn't a that great future for BRU anymore.
Aldo there are done some good steps forward now.

Thai once use to come to BRU too, SO SAD that they left.
When did they leave BRU anyway?

Best regards: Yannick

OrientThai · Post by **OrientThai** » 04 Jan 2005, 19:20

Bruspotter wrote:Hello

Thai once use to come to BRU too, SO SAD that they left.
When did they leave BRU anyway?

Best regards: Yannick

I think it was in 1999 but not 100% sure.
In the past even Asiana, Garuda, MAS... came to BRU, I really hope BRU will get connections to the Far-East again.

Post by **Bruspotter** » 04 Jan 2005, 20:07

Hello

Wow, all with the 747.

Must be.

Too bad i didn't went spotting that much thay period.

:(

Best regards: yannick

Post by **sn26567** » 05 Jan 2005, 09:07

TCAS_climb wrote:When you're 1h flight time away from the mega-hubs of Paris, London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt, what do you expect ?

Who needs a fifth hub in such a small area ?

The same can be said of AMS. So there is no reason why BRU could not be a successful hub.

regi wrote:Air France is now a railway company. (I hear laughter)

BRU-LYS? BRU-BOD? BRU-CFE?

sn-remember · Post by **sn-remember** » 05 Jan 2005, 12:51

TCAS_climb wrote:When you're 1h flight time away from the mega-hubs of Paris, London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt, what do you expect ?

Who needs a fifth hub in such a small area ?

The 4 airports you mention are near saturation and expansion programs are on the table as the predictions show a consistent passenger increase in the future years .

It is up to BRU airport and operators to work together to build up a credible option to the 4 "tigers".

I think BRU is a definite candidate to act as the "fifth wheel of the car".
Let us cross our fingers !
But there is work ahead !
For example the access to the airport as its attraction power should be strongly enhanced...
Some suggestions :

- train link should be developed
- integration to the High Speed Train network (to Koln, possibly Dusseldorf to begin with)
- integrate Low Cost operators into the airport because it broadens the feeding capability
- Rethink the airport offering a choice of services for the passenger comparable to Schiphol (or why not even better ?): market, business, leisure places
- be Ambitious for your airport and you will be surprised of the reward!

ERICAIRLINES · Post by **ERICAIRLINES** » 05 Jan 2005, 13:05

If snba works in the future with BA (merger,take over...),why not imagine a continental hub for BA ?
LHR being overcrowded and with little expansion possible

sn-remember · Post by **sn-remember** » 05 Jan 2005, 13:38

It would be great having a "boss" like BA at BRU !
But at this stage it is only a dream and we have to take it as such !
And I read that LHR has an expansion program in store (T3?) but not before 2008.

To make your dream a reality you have to work hard now, counting on your own resources

concordino · Post by **concordino** » 05 Jan 2005, 14:04

You probably mean T5 - T3 has been around for many decades and T4 is over 20 years old.

There will still be capacity problems at the 'row so other airports could easily be brought into the fold but I guess Birmingham and Manchester might like a share of that pie and have the advantage of being on the right side of the Channel.

OrientThai · Post by **OrientThai** » 05 Jan 2005, 14:08

BRU should have the High-Speed Train connecting the centre of the major Europeans cities (like Amsterdam, Paris, London, Frankfurt...) and their airports.
It should also be cheaper than those big airports like LHR, AMS, CDG...
In this case it will be more economical for an airline to operate to one airport instead of flying to three or four airports that are located each other of one hour flying; and then transfer those passengers with the High-Speed Trains or the local airline to the different Europeans cities.
BRU has a big advantage to be in the middle of CDG, AMS, LHR, and FRA (but right now it is seen as an handicap...) and to have capacity for expansion.
For example SQ cargo has move from CDG and MUC to BRU, and ET cargo will move from OST and AMS to BRU, but these are very rare example and if we get these improvements then the big airlines will come.

DC7-C · Post by **DC7-C** » 05 Jan 2005, 16:06

A question for the members from Belgium, are Belgian labor laws "flexible" enough to propel high rates of growth?
Thx.

sn-remember · Post by **sn-remember** » 05 Jan 2005, 16:15

Thank you for the quick correction Concordino , T5 it must be !

And you are right mentioning Birmingham and Manchester airports legitimate growth expectations !

On the german side , Dusseldorf has declared ambitions to grap its share of the market..

That leaves the PAR-AMS axis which works as a lock at BRU's strong disadvantage for the moment ...

So we shoud'nt definitely rule out any sort of cooperation with any of our 4 neighbours PAR/AMS included !
BRU needs it and they might need an interesting offer at BRU

SicilianFalcon · Post by **SicilianFalcon** » 07 Jan 2005, 20:16

Hey we welcome Heathrows trafic down in London Luton as well

Hell of alot closer then Birmingham.
More bizjets then Liners at the moment Though.
Make that damn runway expansion happen quick!!!

On the other hand did I see someone say SNBA/BA merger?

So then the Belgian national carrier becomes British Airways?

Wouldnt like that if it was my country, Surely you would want a national Airline.

Forza 8)

Post by **sn26567** » 08 Jan 2005, 17:11

SicilianFalcon wrote:On the other hand did I see someone say SNBA/BA merger? So then the Belgian national carrier becomes British Airways?

Not so fast, Falcon! The Chairman of BA said once he could invest some money in SN BA when the time is ripe. It doesn't mean he will take over the whole airline.

It is also no secret that the current shareholders of SN BA want to sell their share, also when the time is ripe. When offer meets demand, you will have a deal!

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 08 Jan 2005, 18:56

Are airline tie-ups really such a good idea? You could get an airline which is doing well and so "merges" with another one. Then airline which had previously done well goes down the pan, and takes the other airline with it. Sabena and Swissair didn't last - that was two airlines gone.

And with less competition, airlines will be able to do what they like and charge what they like. I believe that airlines should "co-operate" but not necessarily merge.

And from what I read in reports, you can get very good service on the "independent" airlines such as bmi and VLM. They seem to value their passengers more than the larger carriers.