Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal

[regi]

Of course, nobody refuses to board a plane because the livery is boring.
However, if you have a really nice livery that attracts attention and makes you stand out in the crowd of airplanes at airports, you get extra attention and (free) publicity. See how MOL operates. He will do anything to get attention and, consequently, free publicity. Ryanair does not need to attract attention at airports through a great looking livery, because in many airports used by Ryanair, this airline is the only one or one of the few to use the airport, and MOL prefers more vulgar ways to attract attention than through a nice livery.
When b.air changed the logo on the tails of their planes, I was hoping they would put a nice lion's head on the tails of thir aircraft to stress their link with Africa. Imagine all those planes in Europe, too, with lion's heads on their tails. That would have attracted attention (imho). Maybe something for SN to think of when they renew the fleet.

Now 2 questions that many designers hate:

• what is the extra profit of such a nice livery ?
  What is the loss if you fly boring looking airplanes?

Airlines are companies which only goal is to make profit.

[Air Key West]

If livery did not count at all, all airlines would be flying plain white aircraft with just their names on it.
Every airline wnats to be noticed, "to leave its mark", to be recognised and hopefully to be remembered.
I don't know anything about the cost aspect, but I presume that some liveries are more expensive to apply and maintain than others. I have no answer to regi's two questions. Has anybody got an answer ? Has this ever been the subject of (marketing) research ? Nobody has to share my opinion. However, I am convinced that an attractive eye-catching livery can be an extra advertising tool.

Let's make an analogy (not 100 % relevant I admit, but just to give an example) : if you have to restaurants located next to each other ; from the outside there's one which looks attractive, because it is decorated in good taste with nice colors ; the other one is just an ordinary restaurant, probably ok, but looking a bit dull from the outside. To which restaurant would you be more inclined to go ?

[sn26567]

Every airline wants to be noticed, "to leave its mark", to be recognised and hopefully to be remembered.

... except the 2 anonymous B767s of JetairFly

[Air Key West]

LOL ! You're right and unfortunately they are probably not the only two aircraft in the world that would prefer to go unnoticed. But I assume you understood I was making a general statement

[DeltaWiskey]

Ok, maybe you are gaining (very) few passengers, but it's certainly not worth the extra cost of the more complicated/attractive paintjob.

Cannot find a good source of the added cost, but this comes close (why had fedex change their c/s):
"Eliminating the purple field can save as much as $1,000 in labor and materials on one 53-foot tractor trailer alone," McGovert says. "And the company owns 10,000 of that type vehicle." Aircraft paint jobs also will cost much less without purple covering nearly half of the jet, and even better, its absence will reduce surface temperatures of the aircraft by 40 degrees, thus lowering energy needed to cool the planes and allowing FedEx to cut back on fuel costs per flight.
http://www.cdf.org/issue_journal/why_fe ... fedex.html

[regi]

Ok, maybe you are gaining (very) few passengers, but it's certainly not worth the extra cost of the more complicated/attractive paintjob.

Cannot find a good source of the added cost, but this comes close (why had fedex change their c/s):
"Eliminating the purple field can save as much as $1,000 in labor and materials on one 53-foot tractor trailer alone," McGovert says. "And the company owns 10,000 of that type vehicle." Aircraft paint jobs also will cost much less without purple covering nearly half of the jet, and even better, its absence will reduce surface temperatures of the aircraft by 40 degrees, thus lowering energy needed to cool the planes and allowing FedEx to cut back on fuel costs per flight.
http://www.cdf.org/issue_journal/why_fe ... fedex.html

well, that are facts.

[RoMax]

Currently it's just not worth it. SN's paint isn't that nice, but it isn't very uggly either. So currently there are much more important investments to be made. Introducing a new paint sheme costs a lot of money, so why would they invest in something like that at this moment while they have to invest in Korongo, more long haul aircraft, fleet replacement, upgrading aircraft cabins...

A new paint can be something for over some years, but currently it's just not worth it.

[regi]

Currently it's just not worth it. SN's paint isn't that nice, but it isn't very uggly either. So currently there are much more important investments to be made. Introducing a new paint sheme costs a lot of money, so why would they invest in something like that at this moment while they have to invest in Korongo, more long haul aircraft, fleet replacement, upgrading aircraft cabins...

A new paint can be something for over some years, but currently it's just not worth it.

sounds logical.
I don't repaint my car with every small scratch even if I have a full cover insurance.

[Air Key West]

Nobody has been suggesting that b.air should change its livery now. From observing what airlines do, I'm tempted to say an airline waits at least ten years before changing the livery of its aircraft just a little (like AF) or considerably (like BA's last two changes). ANd some airlines never seem to change it (KL, for instance, or am I mistaken ?).
Well, I learned something (I think) : why have so many aircraft a nearly plain white fuselage with just the tail characterising the airline (mostly through its logo) ? Apparently, it is the most cost/effective (did I get that right) ? (seems logical, too). Sorry, if this is off topic. Let's go back to the replacement of SN's fleet.

[NCB]

The livery posted on the previous page is really amazing. The current livery only has a nice tail, the rest is very boring and silly. I would give it a shot and send it to B.House, although I don't know how it would look on high-wing Avro's.

I'm glad SN is going somehow in the right direction, that of common sense. I proposed a renewed product for longhaul to remain competitive, and the product is on its way. Same for starting ops to North Africa and LCY.

The one thing I really want to pressure on, especially because management of SN along with Tolip and Regi doesn't seem to share my opinion, is that SN needs to find a clear cut image and product and apply this new product to the replacement aircraft coming in, instead of operating larger aircraft.

While surfing through the forum, one of the members posted a link on the Etihad award topic.
I decided to go and see what passengers and customers have to say about the SN Europe product.
http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/snbrussels.htm

NCL-BRU in Economy Flex. The small embraer plane is operated by BMI Regional. Very punctual service, only one cabin crew each way but they were excellent. The food was good. My only gripe was that I wished I'd flown Economy and saved money. The seat is exactly the same as is the leg oom. In reality, the extra money (which was considerable) is really for a newspaper, a couple of drinks and a cold meal. If you are on a flight for less than two hours, then I would recommend economy.

The biggest problem of Brussels Airlines is that in a mostly small Avroliner cabin three classes are done. Passengers in business do not even have the privacy of a curtain. In business a very cheap champagne is offered. The meal service in so called B flex is usually rather poor

Brussels to Budapest B-Flex: seems the additional cost of B-Flex compared to B-Light is worth when you fly on a B737, as you have a probability to get the seat next to you free. However, if you fly the Avro, the flight is almost always full and you are in exactly the same cramped seats and suffer lack of hand luggage storage space like B-Light - so you pay much money for the privilege of a regular food tray and apple juice

My one complaint is the price, one of my trips was economy (B.Light) and the other economy plus (B.Light+). Although the latter was over twice the price (and even economy is not particularly cheap) there was virtually no difference in the quality of service - a bit more food and that is it. I believe the hand luggage weight limit is a bit higher, but if you check-in online, nobody knows. So my advice is buy the cheapest ticket; though, as previous commentators have said, that is not always possible.

[Polaris]

Is there already more news about a replacement for the Avro RJ and/or Classic? Or should we wait until Lufthansa takes some action? I thought that 6 Avro's were going to leave next year...

[NCB]

Like the above examples show, there's work to be done in the revenue management department. I think that they're doing a great job already making the company profitable but I want to express an opinion to prevent a turn for the worse.

I think that the fare finder on the website is confusing. Is there any one passenger in the world that would pay the fare difference for the upgrade to B.Flex?
It seems that most of the time B.Flex passengers book B.Flex because it is the only option available when B.Light is "sold out". I realize that it's a way to manage yield upwards but as a pax I would feel totally screwed if B.light is sold out and when I board, the airplane is almost empty.

I also think that Business class passengers feel totally disrespected when they get offered the same seat as in economy class, no matter the price they pay.

I think that there is a better way to manage this system in a profitable and passenger friendly way.
Cut out the unmanageable 3-class system and bring back a 2 class cabin, Business and Economy.
Become the main player on the home market by offering majestic service in business class, with huge legroom and 2-2 configuration on A319/A320 and 1-2 configuration on the RJ's. I would give it a 45 degree recline. 3 rows is sufficient for business class, economy can get the standard seat pitch.
IFE systems on the entire fleet with fast internet/wifi (at say 3€ per hour on credit card purchase) and on-board shopping functions on short-haul for additional revenue and additional AVOD functionality for A319/A320 aircraft flying mid-haul.
The way to manage the economy class yields in such a system would be fairly easy. You go break-even with early bookings and the rest of the passengers pay the full fare. Most airline employees never pay for their tickets so they end up forgetting that the majority of passengers start booking future travel 2 months in advance. I think that it would be very easy to manage a system wherein as a main line
45% of the economy cabin is sold more than 90 days in advance at a very low fare (10-40€ one way),
35% between 60 and 90 days in advance at 40-80€ one-way
20% between 30 and 60 days in advance at 80€-150€ one-way
10% between 30 and 1 days in advance at over 150€ one-way
and the necessary variables in function of special events and high demand destinations where you can shift the fares to the higher ones earlier or shift all the fares up.
(110% because you can afford to overbook as many of the early bookings will not show up)

Flexibility can be offered for a premium, not everyone wants a meal with flexibility.

Drinks and snacks in economy should be free (it costs nothing to the airline) but salads, sandwiches and hot snacks should be offered for sale for those who want to eat a light meal, that way you create a healthy balance between B.light and B.Flex meals.

I would even go as far as making passengers pay for checked luggage. Most people travelling Europe don't need checked luggage service. But to keep it healthy I would make it a 10 euro per luggage charge, so that passengers realize that they are paying less for their luggage than with Ryanair (30 EUR) and those who don't need it feel like they saved 10 euro's instead of feeling like they're paying together for a service they don't need. That way SN can also renegotiate their contract with the handler and pay less for less work (more luggage will come in the overheads, much less work below deck) and you save a lot of CO2 emissions from useless luggage. This can work better when the Avro replacement arrives because the Avro bins are too small.

This is what the leisure passenger wants. Bigger airplanes are not a solution, they will only be emptier because no matter what SN does, it can not compete with Ryanair when the airport taxes at BRU are almost on par with Ryanair all-in fares. The cost per seat will go slightly down but passengers will still be paying the same fares. You can not work with such a model with aircraft like the CS100 or E195 where cost per seat is reduced by 10% but trip cost will be the same as with the Avro.
Translated into understandable language that would mean flying a larger airplane with the same amount of passengers paying the same fares, at lower cost per seat but same trip cost and same revenue. Result: ZERO improvement.
Why? you will say. More seats means you can give away some more seats at lower fares,no?
No, because then the current passengers will have the option of buying lower yielding tickets and yield management doesn't want the knock-on effect of that.

You can work on such a model with aircraft like the Q400 because there the cost saving is so dramatic that you can also decrease fares while increasing yields and increase passenger demand by attracting more pax with the lower fares. But most importantly, because with the Q400 you can increase capacity in a meaningful way by increasing frequencies, which by increasing passenger options and convenience, will increase demand.
When you have 7 daily BRU-MXP Q400 instead of 5 daily RJ85/100/CS100, it's almost like a taxi service and no matter what they do, the Ryanair bus service can not match it. 7 Q400 flights will still be 15% cheaper to operate than 5 CS100 flights and the demand will be much higher because of the better schedule options.

Thoughts?

Ps. LH looking into 20+ SSJ100, maybe for SN?
If you think about it, with ETS kicking-in, nimby's complaining more and more about noise pollution and airlines being in the business for the money, the Q400NG is the most reasonable option at this time. If SN manages to become the launch customer for the Q400X, it's even better.

[telspace2005]

@ NCB

2,50 Euros half a liter of water on SN, that makes the cubic meter of mineral water at 5.000,00 Euros !
The question is always the same, why should I fly SN ? as it is finally a LC carriers with only some fuzz added.
The SN routes are almost all duplicated by other carriers, futhermore it is only a 3 stars carriers, and the comments posted on airline quallity forum do not incite you to fly SN...and to prove this, the load factor is one of the poorest in Europe.

[regi]

Dear NCB,
What the ticket price concerns, and the booking site: have you tried to book through ebookers.de ( the German version ! ) already? Than you see some strange things happening. The basic B Light economy prices are the same. But...if you choose for a bit more expensive option, you suddenly see that the remark " you can buy food and drinks" disappears, meaning...you suddenly end in B-flex for much less than on the airline website.
That is just website theory. I don't know if you really would get the B.Flex option if you show up at the check inn with a booking from eBookers.

[regi]

Dear NCB,
I have to agree with Telspace. Aligning Brussels Airlines to LCC models is not the right way. Paying for luggage ( and food ) would push away many passengers.

Squeezing passengers into a narrow turbo prop for some hours is also not done to keep passengers who avoid LCC's by purpose.

You mention a higher frequency. OK, and landing/airport fees? Oops.
Good to mention Milan. Very simple: Bergamo is not Milan. Just as Charleroi is not a southern suburb of Brussels, and Ostend is not a community of Bruges. ( we had this discussion years ago already ) Meaning: Brussels airlines can say they fly to Milan ( well...Malpensa...), but Ryanair cannot.
( despite the real travel time from Malpensa and Bergamo towards Milan inner city is about the same, depending on traffic )
But Brussels Airlines has the connections advantage over Ryanair at Malpensa.
So it is a different product.

Going for the cheapest option is not always a succes. Recent example: Nokair, Thailand. They offer now flights Bangkok-Koh Samui and even Koh Pangan ( where there is no airport ) If you check the booking site, you see that you fly to Nakhon Si Thammarat ( no, not from Surat Thani as Thai Air did ), take a coach to a harbour, and take a catamaran towards the islands. We all know that the fair with Bangkok Airways to Koh Samui ( privately owned airport ) is pretty expensive. But if I have to chose between a flight+coach+ferry or a flight , I know what it will be.
Okay, back to topic: I think it would a dreadful commercial mistake to replace the Avro's by smaller planes and to align the product of a full service carrier to LCC's activities.

[tolipanebas]

Brussels Airlines needs to become the main player on the home market by offering majestic service in business class, with huge legroom and 2-2 configuration on A319/A320 and 1-2 configuration on the RJ's. I would give it a 45 degree recline.

Any idea why nobody is doing that right now in Europe?

I also think that Business class passengers feel totally disrespected when they get offered the same seat as in economy class, no matter the price they pay.

Just for my information, on which European airline can you fly business class while being seated in a different seat than the ones used in economy again?

You go break-even with early bookings and the rest of the passengers pay the full fare.
45% of the economy cabin is sold more than 90 days in advance at a very low fare (10-40€ one way),
35% between 60 and 90 days in advance at 40-80€ one-way
20% between 30 and 60 days in advance at 80€-150€ one-way
10% between 30 and 1 days in advance at over 150€ one-way

So if I do the math right, assuming a 120-seating A319 is used (thus allowing for your 'majestic' business class service), you'd think of breaking even with around 50 times let's say 30 euro then? May I ask you which routes you're thinking of flying? CRL-HHN maybe?

Operating an A319 costs about 4,000 euro an hour easily and that is only the direct operating cost, leaving out airport and governmental taxes as well as all non-operating overhead costs which an airline will have to win back somehow too!

Drinks and snacks in economy should be free: it costs nothing to the airline

Care to elaborate a bit just where an airline can get those free drinks and snacks?
And how I will get them delivered for free on board their planes?
And how I will dispose of the waste for free after the flight?

I would even go as far as making passengers pay for checked luggage.

Wasn't your aim to turn Brussels Airlines into a premium airline?
Why have a dedicated business class otherwise, if you have the image of a LCC as from check-in?

That way SN can also renegotiate their contract with the handler and pay less for less work.

Handling fees are mainly of fixed nature: you don't pay per piece of luggage loaded, you pay for attending your plane and turning it around in XX minutes including (un)loading, cleaning, toilet servicing etc .
Whether the handler does that with 2, 3 or 4 loaders, has no direct effect on your price, unless you can guarantee you'll never have more luggage than can be loaded by let's say 1 handler, meaning you have to have really high luggage prices and a very unfriendly approach to your pax... An airline like SN, which has a lot of long haul connecting pax will never be able to do that, and will thus not be able to guarantee such a thing to their handler, hence he will not lower his price. All your idea would do it create badwill with the pax, while making life easier for the handlers...

more luggage will come in the overheads, much less work below deck and you save a lot of CO2 emissions from useless luggage.

And what was your plane again? Oh, the Q400, right?
Good luck stowing large trolleys in its bins, especially when the plane is full, which I remind is your aim, right?
Or are you going to have a delivery-at-aircraft service, taking trolleys at boarding, handing them back upon arrival? I thought you wanted to reduce the number of ground staff and thus also the cost of handing?

No matter what SN does, it can not compete with Ryanair when the airport taxes at BRU are almost on par with Ryanair all-in fares.

Then why are you copying much of their low service methods in your 'model'?

As I have told you numerous times, you're thowing several loose ideas together, each of which certainly has had its merrits for a cetain type of operator, but none of them in itself is a guarantee for success and the combination of all of them together is making your airline bound for failure as it is not a viable business model for any type of airline!

Having a luxurious business class, yet with a LCC style economy is already a stretch and having low fare pax pay for checking in luggage, yet being forced to offer them a delivery-at-aircraft service for carry-ons is simply insane. Not to mention your choice of aircraft is completely out of the question either, be it for a real LCC or a full service airline. The Q400 is ONLY suitable for an airline operating in a niche markt where demand on the route is not sufficient to cope with bigger planes. As soon as it is, you have to get rid of it asap, or you'll be eaten alive by your competitors, both LCCs as well as full service airlines, which will both operate larger planes and for a very good reason: lower CASM on a route which sees high demand, will allow both of them to compete with you on price, while remaining profitable for much longer! On top of that, the full service airline can also offer more comfort than both the LCC as well as you can!

Sounds like a no brainer to me: if you want the absolute lowest price, use the LCC; if you want a fiar price and a decent service both on the ground as well as in the air, take the full serice airline... and if you have no other choice, take NCB airlines! Do you really want to be the airline of absolute last resort? Soon even your Q400s will be too big then, only to downsize further I suppose?

[sn26567]

Just for my information, on which European airline can you fly business class while being seated in a different seat than the ones used in economy again?

Turkish Airlines, although you might dispute the fact that it is a 'European' airline. I had a very comfortable flight to Istanbul (which is undoubtedly in Europe) with them in the C class of a B738, with wide seats (2+2)and a lot of legroom.

[tolipanebas]

Just for my information, on which European airline can you fly business class while being seated in a different seat than the ones used in economy again?

Turkish Airlines, although you might dispute the fact that it is a 'European' airline. I had a very comfortable flight to Istanbul (which is undoubtedly in Europe) with them in the C class of a B738, with wide seats (2+2)and a lot of legroom.

Well, we're clearly talking domestic ops here, not the periferal flights to IST, CAI, or TLV

Anything like CPH-MUC, LHR-BCN or FRA-MAD for instance, not to limit the scope to just BRU.

You'll have a hard time finding one, and the reason is simple: a plane used on short to medium haul (i.e. domestic EU operations), needs a flexible cabin, meaning that in the morning it must be able to take 20 or more connecting long haul business pax, whereas in the afternoon, it ideally has a full economy cabin to take as much city trippers on board as possible. You can't efficiently do that with a plane configured the way NCB is proposing, hence NOBODY is having that any longer.

[Bralo20]

Well, at least BA has increased seatpitch in Club Europe...

[fretn]

Aeroflot & BMI (sometimes) offer a real business class shorthaul product too.